resy_book

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It explicitly warns 'IRREVERSIBLE' and mentions potential cancellation/no-show fees, disclosing destructive consequences. However, it does not describe the response format or any post-booking effects, which would be useful for full transparency.

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 a single, information-dense sentence with a front-loaded warning ('IRREVERSIBLE'). Every clause adds value: the step indicator, the booking action, the token source, the confirm requirement, and the fee warning. No unnecessary 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?

Given the multi-step booking flow and lack of annotations, the description provides sufficient context for a booking step: it clarifies prerequisites (book_token from preview), required confirmation, and a key consequence (fees). It stops short of detailing the success response or error conditions, but the sibling tools fill some gaps.

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?

The schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage, including the confirm must-true rule and the book_token source. The description repeats the confirm requirement but adds no new parameter-level semantics, so it meets the baseline for good schema coverage.

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 tool's function: it books a reservation using a book_token from resy_booking_preview. The phrase 'STEP 2 of booking — IRREVERSIBLE' provides a specific verb, resource, and key characteristic, distinguishing it from preview or search siblings.

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 identifies its position in the booking workflow ('STEP 2') and specifies that the book_token must come from resy_booking_preview. It also states the confirm requirement, giving clear usage context. While it doesn't enumerate alternatives, the sequencing makes the intended use unambiguous.

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