lookup_booking

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations, including the identity verification process, required prerequisites, and that it returns confirmation number and booking summary. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and well-structured. The first sentence conveys the core purpose, followed by clear prerequisite bullet points and then related tool references. Every sentence adds value, and the information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is complete for the tool's complexity: it covers all six parameters, explains the verification requirements, and states the return value (confirmation number and booking summary). No output schema is present, but the description adequately sets expectations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant meaning: it explains that first_name and last_name are required, and at least one of confirmation_number, email, or last_four_card (with check_in_date) must be provided as a verification factor. This goes beyond the schema's field descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Look up a reservation by verifying the guest's identity. Returns the confirmation number and booking summary.' It specifies the action (look up) and resource (reservation), and distinguishes from sibling tools like cancel_booking and resend_confirmation by mentioning them as alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: it lists prerequisites (guest full name and at least one verification factor) and states that if the guest cannot provide any verification, the reservation cannot be looked up. It also mentions alternatives: use resend_confirmation after identity verification or cancel_booking.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.