Find hotels within walking or short-transit distance of an event venue. If no check_in/check_out provided, defaults to one night before through one night after the event (2-night stay). Returns nightly price, total cost, distance, transport mode (walk vs rideshare), and travel time to venue.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| guests | No | ||
| check_in | No | ||
| currency | No | ||
| event_id | No | ||
| check_out | No | ||
| radius_km | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: it explains the automatic 2-night stay default when no dates are provided and enumerates the specific return fields (nightly price, total cost, distance, transport mode, travel time). This exceeds annotation-only information, though it omits details like pagination or rate limits.
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?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes essential behavioral and output information without redundant wording. Every clause adds value.
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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and return fields, making it adequate. However, it leaves many parameter meanings and usage exclusions unaddressed, so the agent still has to infer significant details. This is a clear gap for a tool of this complexity.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage and 8 parameters, the description must compensate. It explains the check_in/check_out default behavior and implies a radius via 'walking or short-transit distance', but it fails to explain event_id/slug, limit, guests, currency, and radius_km. This leaves most parameters semantically opaque to the agent.
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 the specific verb 'Find' and clearly identifies the resource as 'hotels near event venue'. It also specifies the scope (walking or short-transit distance) and lists the return fields, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_events or search_packages.
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 clearly implies when to use this tool—when hotel accommodations near an event are needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusions, but it provides clear context about default date behavior and output, which helps an agent decide on invocation.
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 resource or action: events, packages, experiences, hotels, and link building for events vs packages. The descriptions explicitly cross-reference to prevent confusion, such as 'Use build_package_link instead' and 'use search_packages instead'.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: build_event_link, build_package_link, get_event_details, search_events, search_experiences, search_hotels_near_event, search_packages. The verbs (build, get, search) are used predictably.
Seven tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range for a domain. Each tool serves a distinct purpose in the event/package discovery and link-generation workflow, with no redundancy or unnecessary additions.
The tool set covers the core workflows: searching events, getting event details, searching hotels and experiences, searching packages, and generating links for both events and packages. A minor gap is the lack of a get_package_details tool to retrieve package details programmatically, but agents can work around it by sending users to the package page.
