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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only, open-world, and idempotent, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by enumerating the response content (description, location, price-from, canonical URL), which goes beyond what annotations say. No contradictions found.

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?

Two concise sentences are directly to the point. Front-loaded information covers purpose, key outputs, and usage sequence with no filler or repetition.

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 one required parameter, no output schema, and helpful annotations, the description provides sufficient detail about both input (slug) and expected output fields. No pagination or complex behavior is involved, so this description is complete enough for reliable use.

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 schema fully documents the single 'slug' parameter, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by showing the slug appears in the canonical /hotel/<slug> URL and implying it comes from search_hotels results, which helps an agent understand how to derive the value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get detail') and resource ('Tuki Hotel landing'), and lists concrete returned fields including description, location, price-from, and canonical URL. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling detail tools by focusing on hotel landing pages and the /hotel/<slug> URL pattern.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use after search_hotels,' providing clear when-to-use context. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but the sequential guidance is a strong usage indicator.

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