list_bookings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a non-obvious fact: the server filters by since_utc and always sends a time bound, while arrival filters are applied client-side. This goes beyond the schema, which only describes parameter types and defaults. It doesn't cover pagination or error handling, but for a list tool with an output schema, the core behavioral nuance is addressed.

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 precise sentences, no fluff. The purpose is stated first, followed immediately by the critical nuance. Every word contributes to correct usage, making it 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?

Given that an output schema exists and all parameters are documented in the schema, the description covers the one non-obvious behavioral aspect that could cause incorrect invocation. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly. It is complete for its role.

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 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying the relationship between since_utc (always sent, default 180 days ago) and arrival_start/arrival_end (client-side filters). This additional context helps an agent understand the semantics of the time-bound filter beyond the schema defaults. Since coverage is high, the baseline is 3, and this extra guidance earns a 4.

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 'List bookings' — a specific verb and resource. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_booking (singular) and other list_* tools (list_properties, list_quotes, etc.). No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explains the key usage constraint: the endpoint is bound by since_utc (time-based), not stay dates, and directs the user to use arrival_start/arrival_end for stay-window narrowing. While it doesn't name alternative tools for exclusion, it provides actionable guidance that prevents a common misuse. This is more than 'implied usage' but stops short of full alternative comparison.

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