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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the total is 'el mismo monto que se cobra en mrbnb.cl' and on failure it returns the reason for unavailability.

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?

Content is front-loaded (price breakdown first, availability fallback last) and every clause carries information. The Spanish text is fully duplicated in English, roughly doubling length, which is defensible for a bilingual audience but not maximally concise.

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 return-value burden and does so, listing the exact breakdown fields and the unavailability message. The only gap is the unexplained `moneda` reference and no mention of the max-90-nights constraint at the tool level (it lives only in the checkout schema description).

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, making 3 the baseline. The description adds that the amounts are returned in the same currency as mrbnb.cl, but it references a `moneda` parameter that does not exist in the input schema, which is a minor inconsistency rather than added clarity.

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 ('Desglose de precio de un departamento para unas fechas') and enumerates exactly what it produces (noches, precio por noche, limpieza, total, estadía mínima, link de reserva). This is clearly distinct from sibling buscar_disponibilidad (search) and link_de_reserva (booking link).

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 implies its usage (quote a price for one apartment and date range) and the schema notes departamento_id comes from buscar_disponibilidad, so the workflow is inferable. However, it never explicitly states when to use this tool versus buscar_disponibilidad or link_de_reserva, nor any prerequisites.

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