tock_list_reservations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so description does not need to repeat safety. Description adds value by confirming the tool lists the signed-in user's own reservations, which implies data access control, but no further behavioral traits are disclosed. No contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence front-loads the purpose and returned fields. Second sentence covers the prerequisite. Highly efficient.

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?

Description covers purpose, returned fields, parameter defaults (status default is upcoming) implicitly via schema, and authentication requirement. No output schema, but description lists returned fields. Slight gap: does not explain pagination semantics beyond offset/limit, but sufficient for basic usage.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, describing all three parameters (limit, offset, status) with default values and constraints. Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'List the signed-in user's Tock reservations' with specific details (venue, date/time, party size, experience) and reservation types (upcoming, past, canceled). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tock_get_availability.

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 states requirement: 'Requires a browser tab signed in to exploretock.com via the fetchproxy extension.' This tells when to use. Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but sibling tools cover other operations, so guidance is clear.

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