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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: it explains that an unavailable result returns a reason, that the total matches the amount charged at mrbnb.cl, and that it reports minimum stay and booking link.

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 core breakdown is front-loaded, but the same content is then repeated almost verbatim in English, doubling length without adding information. The list of returned fields is exhaustive rather than prioritized.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing results, and it does so well (nights, nightly price, cleaning, discount, total, payment method, minimum stay, booking link, plus unavailability reason). Only the input-side context and any currency/payment constraints on invocation are thin.

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 four input parameters are already documented. The description adds little about those inputs themselves; its `moneda`, `pago`, and `descuento` references appear to describe result fields rather than the declared parameters, so the 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 names a precise verb+resource (price quote for one apartment and date range) and enumerates the returned components, which distinguishes it from buscar_disponibilidad (availability lookup) and link_de_reserva (booking link only). An agent can tell what it produces without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is only implied: the departamento_id parameter notes it 'viene en buscar_disponibilidad', suggesting a follow-up call after an availability search. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this tool over its siblings or what preconditions must hold.

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