get_holds

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing that results are scoped to the signed-in user, that the call maps to POST /v2/getHolds, and that returned data is oriented around aliases/ids rather than raw ids.

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 short sentences, each adding distinct value: what the tool does, when to use it, and how to use the results. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 parameterless read-only list tool with readOnly/destructive annotations and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It states the scope, the purpose of the returned data, and the relationship to downstream tools.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description also confirms the request body is empty ('{}'), which removes any ambiguity about calling conventions.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('scheduling Holds (booking pages)') and scope ('for the signed-in user'). It also references sibling tools get_hold/create_hold, helping an agent distinguish this list operation from related action tools.

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 explicitly says when to call this tool: when hold aliases/ids are needed before get_hold or create_hold. It also gives practical guidance ('Name/alias first, never lead with id'), which clarifies usage conventions beyond just listing holds.

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