juggle_cancel_booking

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description goes well beyond them: sitter and applicants are notified, there is no undo, penalty rules are time-boxed to 12 hours, and only one penalty type is supported. It additionally names the prompt-injection guard and the MCP_CONFIRM_MODE preview/confirmToken sequence.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the irreversibility warning, then penalty constraints, then safety/confirmation rules — a sensible escalation. It is dense and slightly repetitive with the schema on confirmToken, but nearly every sentence carries a constraint an agent could otherwise get wrong.

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 destructive, open-world mutation with no output schema, the definition covers consequences, reversibility, penalty eligibility, confirmation flow, and injection defense. An agent has everything needed to decide whether to call it and how to sequence the call.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real behavior: reason accepts an id or a label and the tool enumerates valid ones on a miss, details is optional free text shared with the sitter, and accept_one_star_review is bound to the late-cancellation penalty. It does not add much on booking_id or confirmToken beyond what the schema already says.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'Cancel one of your Juggle bookings (sits/jobs)' — and immediately scopes it to the caller's own bookings. No sibling tool shares this verb/resource pair, so an agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly defines when the tool applies and when it does not: within 12 hours of start (or after start) it only ever applies the one-star-review penalty and never pays the cancellation fee, redirecting the agent to whyjuggle.com instead. It also states the confirmation prerequisite and the two-step fallback ordering.

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