search_captainsSearch bookable charter captains, optionally filtered by harbor, with sorting and pagination. Returns a paginated list with starting price and rating.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| sort | No | rating | |
| limit | No | ||
| harbor | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint true, and the description adds that results are paginated and include 'starting price and rating'. This enhances transparency beyond annotations without contradiction.
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, no wasted words. First sentence states action and options; second describes output. Efficient and well-structured.
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?
Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description covers harbor, sorting, pagination, and return fields. Missing details like default sort order or other possible output fields, but still provides a solid foundation for agent usage.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'harbor' as an optional filter and mentions 'sorting and pagination', but does not detail enum values for sort or the exact meaning of page/limit. It adds value but leaves some interpretation to 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 specifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'bookable charter captains'. It differentiates from sibling search_boats by targeting captains and adds 'bookable' context, making the purpose distinct and unambiguous.
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 states input options (harbor filter, sorting, pagination) but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like search_boats. It is clear on what the tool does, providing good context for when to use it.
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 targets a distinct action or resource: availability checks, bookings (with/without captain), data retrieval for boats/captains/harbors, quotes, and searches. The descriptions clearly differentiate similar tools like create_boat_rental vs. create_booking.
All tool names follow consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., check_availability, create_booking, search_boats). No mixing of styles or ambiguous verbs.
10 tools is well-suited for a booking platform covering search, details, quotes, and booking creation. Every tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy.
The core booking workflow (search, check availability, quote, create) is fully covered. Missing tools for viewing existing bookings or cancellations, but these are minor gaps for a public-facing API.