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

Annotations already declare this is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: amenities are as stated by the hotel, extra_charge indicates a stated surcharge, and an absent mark means no information rather than free.

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 compact and front-loaded with the usage condition. Every sentence contributes either routing guidance, return semantics, or identification details, with no redundant restatement of the title or schema.

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?

Given the output schema, annotations, and fully documented parameters, the description covers what the tool does, when to use it, how to identify the hotel, and important return-value nuances. Nothing essential for correct invocation appears to be missing.

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%, so the schema documents each parameter. The description still adds meaning by explaining the two identification paths: URL from search_hotels, or name plus place_id, and notes that other_matches lists similar names at that place.

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: it answers what one specific hotel offers and returns its amenities. It clearly distinguishes the tool from search_hotels (which supplies the URL) and find_place (which supplies place_id), so an agent can select it confidently.

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 a clear usage trigger with concrete examples such as pets, sauna, and halal food. It also routes the agent to sibling tools for hotel identification, though it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool or compare it with get_price_guide.

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