resy_list_reservations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing what each result contains (resy_token, occasion, special_request, cancellability), which is important given there is no output schema. Pagination or result limits are still unstated, keeping it from a 5.

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 tight sentences, zero filler, with the default behavior front-loaded before the alternate scope values and the return-value note. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by naming the key fields, including the token needed for cancellation. Combined with the enum explanation and annotations, an agent has everything needed to call and use the result correctly.

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% and the enum lists values without meaning. The description compensates fully: it explains the default (upcoming) and the effect of the other two enum values ("past" or "all" to broaden). This is exactly the meaning the schema lacks.

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 ("List the user's Resy reservations") that immediately separates it from siblings like resy_list_favorites or resy_list_payment_methods. An agent can identify the operation 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?

Gives clear context for use: default behavior is upcoming reservations, and scope="past"/"all" broadens it. It also tells the agent the results carry the resy_token needed for resy_cancel, linking it to a downstream tool. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use exclusions, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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