book_walk

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions authentication requirements (environment variables) which is valuable, but doesn't describe what happens when booking succeeds/fails, whether it's idempotent, rate limits, or confirmation details. For a booking tool with no annotations, this leaves significant behavioral 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?

The description is appropriately sized with two sentences that each serve distinct purposes: stating the core functionality and specifying prerequisites. It's front-loaded with the main action. However, the second sentence about environment variables could be more integrated with the tool's purpose.

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 7 parameters with 100% schema coverage but no annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic context about authentication but lacks information about return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances. For a booking tool with multiple parameters, this leaves the agent with incomplete operational understanding.

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 all 7 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema. According to guidelines, with high schema coverage (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in description.

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 action ('Book a dog walking session') and target resource ('on wagwalking.com'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate this booking tool from the 'schedule_recurring' sibling tool, which might handle recurring bookings versus this one-time booking.

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 context by mentioning environment variable prerequisites (WAG_EMAIL and WAG_PASSWORD), but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'schedule_recurring' or 'search_walkers' first. It provides some guidance but lacks explicit when/when-not instructions.

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