banquets__get_reserve_terminal_groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a specific MCP-server throttling limit (20 requests/60s) and advises caching the result in the dialogue, which is useful operational behavior beyond the 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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: what the tool returns, how to get input, and a usage constraint. The most important information is front-loaded, and there is no filler.

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?

For a single-parameter read-only lookup, the description covers the return subject, input sourcing, and an operational constraint (caching/throttling). It doesn't describe the output structure, but with no output schema and low complexity, this is acceptable especially given the annotations.

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 description coverage is 0% at the top level, but the description compensates by mapping organizationIds to the sibling tool organizations__get_organizations, telling the agent exactly where to obtain valid IDs. It reinforces the nested schema's own note, adding a direct MCP-level pointer.

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 states the resource ('terminal groups of organizations') with the key qualifier 'available for reservation', which distinguishes it from the generic terminal-group siblings like terminal_groups__get_terminal_groups. It uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb, but the intent is unambiguous.

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 implies a reservation use case via 'available for reservation' and gives a concrete prerequisite: where to obtain organizationIds (organizations__get_organizations). It does not explicitly contrast this tool with generic terminal-group tools or state when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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