wp_get_booking

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It conveys that this is a read/get operation and that the Bookings plugin is required, which is useful. However, it does not disclose failure behavior, return shape, or what happens if the ID is invalid or the plugin is inactive.

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?

One compact sentence with the action front-loaded and the plugin requirement in a short parenthetical. There is no redundant or filler content; 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 simple single-ID getter with one required parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential invocation facts: resource, ID, and plugin prerequisite. It does not describe error/return behavior, but the tool's simplicity and obvious return value make it sufficiently complete for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema already fully documents the single id parameter with type and description, so schema coverage is 100%. The description's phrase 'by ID' reinforces but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('a WooCommerce Booking by ID'), clearly identifying what the tool does and the required plugin. It is distinct from sibling get tools like wp_get_order or wp_get_product because it explicitly names WooCommerce 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 states the key precondition: the WooCommerce Bookings plugin must be installed. It provides enough context for an agent to know when this tool is appropriate, and there is no competing booking-fetch sibling that would cause confusion. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or when-not conditions.

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