Get a service

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral value by disclosing what the record contains (booking settings, types, occupancy, durations/prices, buffers, group bookings, questions), which matters because there is no output schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the return contents second; no filler or redundancy.

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 usefully enumerates what comes back, and annotations cover the read-only profile. It is close to complete for a simple 2-param lookup, though a hint about missing/not-found behavior would round it out.

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 100%, with both parameters documented including the 24-hex-char pattern and the include_contact_details semantics, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('One service by ID') and enumerates the returned facets (booking settings, buffers, group bookings, booking questions). It is clear, though it never distinguishes itself from the sibling list_services beyond the implied singular vs. plural.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'by ID' signals a single-record lookup, and the sibling list_services implies the plural alternative, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-prefer-list guidance.

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