list_citiesList the cities with hotel booking-timing data on Best Time to Book Hotels. Optionally filter by a search string. Call this first to learn coverage.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| search | No | Optional filter matched against city and country names |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates the tool is read-only and non-destructive ('List'), but does not disclose output structure or potential limitations. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not rich.
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 sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and usage guidance appears immediately after, making it easy to parse.
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?
The description covers the tool's role and primary use case. However, it lacks detail about the output format (e.g., whether it returns city names, objects, or markers), which would be useful for agents. Minor gap, but overall complete for a simple tool.
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%, and the description restates the parameter's purpose ('Optionally filter by a search string'). This matches the baseline for high coverage, adding no extra meaning beyond the schema.
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 verb 'List' and the resource 'cities with hotel booking-timing data'. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by explaining the tool's role as an initial discovery step ('Call this first to learn coverage').
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 provides clear context for when to use the tool ('Call this first to learn coverage'), implying it should be used before other tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool addresses a distinct aspect: booking advice, calendar events, last-minute deals, and city listing. No functional overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_*, list_*), making them predictable.
With 4 tools, the server is compact yet covers the core functionalities of a hotel booking-timing service.
The tool set provides all necessary operations for the declared domain: advice, calendar, deals, and city discovery. No obvious gaps.