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

The description adds the key behavioral trait: the tool refuses deletion if a booking is attached, suggesting the need to delete the booking first. This complements the destructiveHint annotation by clarifying the refusal condition, which is critical for the agent to avoid errors.

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 a single sentence with no wasteful words. It concisely states the action and the key condition, making it highly scannable and front-loaded.

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 a single parameter, no output schema, and a straightforward mutation, the description covers the essential usage and a critical edge case. It is complete for the tool's complexity, though it doesn't mention other potential effects (e.g., cascading changes), which are not necessary based on the provided schema.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description doesn't detail the stay_id parameter beyond the schema. However, the single parameter is self-explanatory: it identifies the stop to delete. No enums or nested objects exist, so minimal additional semantics are needed. 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?

The description clearly states the tool removes a stop from a trip, a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools targeting other entities (accommodation, activity, flight, etc.) and from update_stay.

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?

It implies usage for deleting stops and explicitly mentions when to use an alternative: 'delete the booking instead' when a booking exists. It lacks explicit exclusions for other scenarios, but the clear contrast with the booking deletion provides practical guidance.

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