search_bookings_by_customer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention if the tool is read-only, whether permissions are needed, pagination, or error handling. It only states the return format, missing important traits for a search tool.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured with an Args section and Returns section. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words.

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 search tool with 3 optional parameters and an output schema, the description explains parameters well. However, it does not clarify behavior when both name and email are provided (AND vs OR), or what happens when no search criteria are given. The return mention is sufficient, but some gaps remain.

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%, but the description adds useful meaning: 'Full or partial... (case-insensitive)' for customer_name and customer_email, and the range for days_back. This goes beyond the bare schema and helps the agent understand parameter usage.

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 clearly states the verb 'Search' and the resource 'bookings', and specifies criteria 'by customer name or email'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'search_bookings_by_date' which searches by date, and 'get_booking' which retrieves a specific booking.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or point to siblings like 'search_bookings_by_date' for date-based queries. The context signals and sibling names imply differentiation but the description itself lacks explicit usage guidelines.

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