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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful traits: LIVE prices, totals for the whole stay, USD, taxes and fees included, a 15-result cap, and default sort behavior. It omits any rate-limit, caching, or freshness caveats beyond 'LIVE'.

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?

Three dense, front-loaded sentences with no filler; pricing and result behavior are stated efficiently. Slightly compressed but nothing wasted.

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?

For a 9-param, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers return count, sorting, currency, tax inclusion, and the handoff to get_hotel. It could say more about required fields or edge behavior, but an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 78%, so the schema documents most parameters itself. The description adds context on destination types (city/region/resort area) and that prices reflect the whole party, but the sort semantics it mentions are already spelled out in the schema enum description.

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 (search) and resource (hotels and resorts) with scope (destination, dates, party), and implicitly distinguishes itself from the detail sibling get_hotel by noting it returns ids for that tool.

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?

Gives clear context that this is the discovery step whose ids feed get_hotel, which routes the agent correctly. However, it never states when not to use it or any prerequisites/exclusions, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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