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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to restate those. The description adds content context (what data is returned) but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as output format, potential errors, or scope limitations. With annotations covering safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core grouping and immediately lists the included data categories. It contains no filler or redundant wording, making it highly efficient.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the return content (categories, counts, size range, occupancy, guarantee categories). It does not mention possible limitations or output structure, but these are not critical for a simple lookup. It is nearly complete, though it could hint at the difference from getCabinDetail.

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 the schema already documents the 'ship' parameter with an example. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: get cabins, grouped by type, and explicitly lists the data provided (categories, counts, size range, occupancy, guarantee categories). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like getCabinDetail (which likely handles specific cabins) and getShipProfile (general ship info).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the required ship parameter. While the purpose is clear, it leaves the agent to infer usage context from the sibling names alone.

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