get_reservation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates a read operation, but does not mention idempotency, error behavior, or that it returns data without side effects. The example implies a successful lookup.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that front-load the purpose and include a clear usage example. No wasted 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 tool has a single parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the main return fields (player list, court, time, cost). It is mostly complete, though it could mention error cases (e.g., invalid ID) or idempotency.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description only says 'by id' without adding details about the reservation_id parameter's format, range, or source. The example shows a numeric value, but this is insufficient to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool fetches a single reservation by ID and lists the return fields (player list, court, time, cost). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_reservations that return multiple reservations.

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 provides a concrete example of when to use the tool ('show reservation 8888 - who booked it?'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as list_reservations for multiple reservations.

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