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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it returns a URL rather than performing a booking, and explains how providing gondola_rate_id changes the destination from a generic hotel page to a rate-specific checkout page. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is stated first, the usage trigger second, and the optional parameter behavior last. Every sentence earns its place and the structure front-loads the most important information.

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 low-complexity, read-only link-generation tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, when to use it, what it returns, and how the optional parameter changes the result. Nothing critical is missing.

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 parameters are already well documented. The description mostly restates what the gondola_rate_id schema says, adding little new semantic value beyond confirming the deep-linking behavior. With full schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get a booking link for a hotel on Gondola.' It further clarifies the tool returns a URL with pre-filled dates, distinguishing it from an actual booking operation. The optional rate deep-link behavior is clearly described, making the tool's purpose unambiguous even among siblings like get_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?

Provides an explicit usage trigger: 'Use this when a user wants to book a specific hotel.' This gives clear context for when to invoke the tool, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, such as when a user wants to complete a booking rather than get a link.

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