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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses an important limitation: booking cannot be completed through this tool and the traveller must be directed to page_url. It also explains what page_url enables. It stops short of describing response format or error behavior, but the key workflow constraint is clearly surfaced.

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 purpose and includes essential booking caveats. The second sentence is slightly repetitive, restating that the traveller should be directed to page_url, but it still provides valuable workflow context.

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 simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned (itinerary, inclusions, pricing, page_url) and how to handle the booking flow. It could mention return shape or errors, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 documentation covers the single slug parameter 100%, including an example. The description adds little beyond saying 'by its slug,' which is sufficient because there are no other parameters to explain.

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 full details for one tour package by its slug,' and enumerates the included content (itinerary, inclusions, pricing). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like search_tours and get_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?

The description makes the primary usage context clear: the caller must have a specific slug and wants full tour details. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use the tool, but the by-slug and full-details framing implies the distinction from searching and pricing lookup.

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