Bookings for a performance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to restate safety. It adds behavioral context by describing the returned data (totals, summary) and the optional attendee expansion, which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions found.

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 with no fluff, front-loaded with the primary purpose and a clear optional parameter note. Every sentence 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 adequately conveys the return shape (bookings with totals and summary) and the optional include_attendees behavior. It omits include_contact_details and max_bookings, but these are optional and likely inferable from the schema. The overall purpose is well-covered.

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 75% (3 of 4 params documented), but the description only mentions include_attendees, duplicating the schema text. It does not clarify max_bookings, which lacks a schema description, leaving a gap for the agent. The description fails to compensate for the uncovered parameter.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource: 'Who is coming to one performance date' and enumerates the output ('every booking with totals... and an overall summary'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_booking (single booking) and list_upcoming_performances (future events).

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 establishes a clear context ('one performance date') and gives a usage hint for the include_attendees flag, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_booking. It provides enough context to infer the right use case without exclusions.

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