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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantive context: it returns name, url and status with the text, explains status-dependent quoting/bookability, and warns not to invent prices, dates or availability. This goes well beyond the annotations and clarifies safe quoting.

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 front-loaded with the core action and stays focused on relevant scope/status rules. It is somewhat dense with multiple status names and constraints, but each sentence contributes useful guidance rather than repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description still explains the returned fields (name, url, status plus page text) and how status affects use. It also covers source, alternatives, and quoting constraints, making it complete for a one-parameter read tool.

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?

The single slug parameter has 100% schema description coverage, including the exact-source wording, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description reinforces the source list but does not add new syntax or validation details beyond 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 uses a specific verb ('Get the full public page text') and resource ('one trip'), and explicitly scopes it to slugs from list_tours or list_golf_trips. It also distinguishes this tool from list_tours for on-sale tours, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit conditions for use: trips sold on request or coming-soon tours, by slug from the list tools. It names alternatives and exclusions: use request_quote for on_request trips, list_tours for on-sale tours, and register_interest tours cannot be booked.

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