get_booking

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return content (flight details, passenger info, booking status) which is valuable, but doesn't mention authentication requirements, error conditions, or rate limits. 'Retrieve an existing' implies read-only but isn't explicit about safety.

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 sentences with zero waste: first states purpose and input, second specifies return values. Front-loaded with core functionality. Every word earns 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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description provides good context: purpose, input, and return content. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from mentioning authentication needs or error handling for completeness.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the single parameter fully. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (confirmation number format example). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Retrieve'), target resource ('Delta booking'), and key identifier ('by confirmation number'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_flight_status (status only) or get_flight_details (flight-specific) by focusing on the complete booking record.

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 implies usage when you need booking details via confirmation number, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like manage_booking (for modifications) or get_flight_status (for status only). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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