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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that it 'fetches tour details' and 'prepares map data,' which implies a read-only operation but does not disclose details like output format, potential errors, or rate limits. The description adds some behavioral context but is not comprehensive.

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 concise, with two sentences that are front-loaded with the use case. Every word serves a purpose; no filler or redundant information.

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?

The description gives a solid overview of the tool's behavior and output ('map data with all itinerary locations, coordinates, and day-by-day information'). While it lacks explicit output schema details, the description is adequate for an agent to understand what to expect and when to use it, especially given the simplicity of the 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?

Schema description coverage is 50%, with only 'currency' documented. The description mentions 'one or more tours,' which aligns with the required 'tourIds' parameter, but it does not explicitly explain what tourIds are or how to provide them. Currency is described in the schema, and the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given the partial coverage and marginal additional context.

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's function: showing tour routes on a map and comparing itineraries visually. It uses specific language ('see tour routes on a map', 'compare itineraries visually') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like tour-details or tour-search which serve different purposes.

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 first sentence provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'when the user wants to see tour routes on a map or compare itineraries visually.' This gives clear context, though it does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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