Create a guest link for a booking

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

Adds substantial value beyond annotations: endpoint path, required scopes/bookings:write, OAuth scope, data sensitivity, and the fact that links are revocable and that an Idempotency-Key is required. The idempotentHint=false annotation is consistent with the description telling the caller to supply a key for safe retries, not contradicted by it.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, with operational metadata (scopes, idempotency, workspace) following efficiently. Slightly dense but every line carries operational weight.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers auth, idempotency, and workspace scoping for a mutating tool. The only meaningful gap is the lifetime semantics of the generated links, which are left to the schema's numeric bounds.

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 coverage is 60%. The description clarifies idempotencyKey and workspaceId/workspaceSlug beyond the schema, but says nothing about expiresInHours (default 168, max 720), which is the one body parameter lacking a schema description and matters for guest link lifetime.

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?

Specific verb (mint/create) plus resource (guest reschedule/cancel links) and the business reason (let a lead move the call without an account). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling luca_bookings_guest_links_revoke and from generic booking mutations.

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?

Clear context for use: scopes, workspace override, and retry behavior are spelled out. It does not explicitly name when NOT to use it versus revoke/update alternatives, so it stays below a 5.

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