get_hotel_detailsGet full property details (description, amenities, photos, policies, location) for a hotel, identified by its ref from search_hotels (or its supplierCode + supplierHotelId).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ref | No | The hotel `ref` from search (e.g. 'tbo:1360717'). | |
| supplierCode | No | Alternative to `ref`: supplier code. | |
| supplierHotelId | No | Alternative to `ref`: supplier hotel id. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms read-only behavior by describing it as 'Get... details'. It adds behavioral context by noting the identification requirement from a previous search, which is valuable. No contradictions.
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 clear sentence with essential information front-loaded. No unnecessary words or redundancy.
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?
Despite no output schema, the description lists returned data (description, amenities, photos, policies, location). Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. It lacks mention of error conditions or rate limits, but for a simple retrieval tool, this is mostly complete.
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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond explaining relationships (ref from search, alternative usage). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already covers parameter semantics.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves full property details for a hotel, listing specific data (description, amenities, photos, policies, location) and identifying the hotel by 'ref' from search_hotels or alternative supplier codes. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_hotels (which returns a list) and get_rooms (likely room-specific).
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 explicitly says to use the 'ref' from search_hotels or supplierCode+supplierHotelId, implying this tool is for fetching details after a search. It provides clear context on how to invoke it but does not state when not to use it or compare with alternatives.
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 action or resource: searching, fetching details, checkout flows, booking management, trips, and payment methods. Overlaps like search vs search_hotels and get_booking vs get_my_booking are differentiated by input type or purpose, avoiding ambiguity.
Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (e.g., add_trip_item, create_checkout, get_rooms). A few exceptions like `fetch` and `search` lack a verb prefix, but they are still descriptive and fit the overall convention.
With 18 tools, the server covers the full hotel booking lifecycle without overwhelming complexity. Each tool serves a clear purpose, and the count is well-scoped for the domain.
The tool set covers searching, viewing details, booking, checkout, cancellations, modifications, trips, and payment methods. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no delete_trip or update_payment_method), but the core workflows for booking management are complete.