alaska_get_booking

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation and lists return content, but lacks details on authorization requirements, error handling for invalid codes, or any side effects. It meets a minimum standard but leaves gaps.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no unnecessary words. Every piece of information is relevant and earn 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 one required parameter and no output schema, the description tells what the tool returns but omits important context like authentication state (sibling alaska_login suggests login may be needed) and error scenarios. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for the single parameter 'confirmation_code' (6-character code). The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'retrieve' and the specific resource 'booking details' using a confirmation code. It explicitly lists return contents (passenger info, flight details, booking status), and the tool name and siblings like 'alaska_cancel_booking' show it's distinct.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., alaska_get_flight_details, alaska_get_upcoming_trips). It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing to be logged in, or situations where this tool is inappropriate.

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