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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those annotations: the results are live from the supplier, and the status field disambiguates an empty list between 'no rooms' and a 'supplier outage'. This is valuable operational information.

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 tight sentences: purpose, return contents, and status interpretation. Every sentence adds distinct value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 read-only pricing tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential return shape (room totals, fees, cancellation terms, booking URL) and edge-case semantics (empty list via status). The only remaining detail is the slug source, which is also included. Nothing critical is missing.

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 schema already documents all seven parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond indicating the stay context (checkin/checkout) and the slug source. A baseline 3 is appropriate since structured data carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 identifies the resource: every room and rate for one property over an exact stay, live from the supplier. It does not use a strong imperative verb like 'returns' or 'lists', and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as search_stays or get_property, but the intent is unmistakable.

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 usage context by mentioning 'an exact stay' and referencing 'the property slug from search_stays', which tells the agent this is a follow-up to property search. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions relative to siblings like get_property or search_stays.

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