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

Annotations already declare the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world profile, so the safety bar is met structurally. The description adds genuine behavioral context by listing what each record contains and by disclosing the important caveat that a cottage's price depends on dates, which steers the agent away from trusting the returned price for cottages.

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, front-loaded with the verb and the inventory it exposes, followed by the routing instruction. Every clause earns its place; no filler or repetition of the title.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, yet the description still previews the record shape helpfully. Combined with the entry-point guidance and the price_cottages caveat, an agent has everything needed to select and call this tool 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 description coverage is 100% and both filters (business slug, category enum) are fully documented in the schema, including the kayak/accessory clarification. The description adds no filter syntax or semantics beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Every product on sale') and enumerates the concrete product kinds (cottages, kayaks, parking, moorage, charters) along with the fields returned (id, business, capacity, count, published price). It is immediately distinguishable from get_product (single lookup) and price_cottages (date-dependent pricing).

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?

'Start here: every other tool takes a product id from this list' explicitly positions the tool as the entry point and explains its relationship to every sibling. It also names the alternative for the one case it doesn't cover — cottage pricing varies by date, so use price_cottages.

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