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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that by spelling out what the snapshot contains (aggregated counts, median price, best/worst attributes), which matters since there is no output schema. It stops short of disclosing data freshness, caching, or coverage limits.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the payload and followed by the routing rule. Every clause earns its place, and the counter-example is compact rather than redundant.

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 single-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description supplies exactly the missing piece: what the response will contain. Combined with the rich annotations and the routing guidance, an agent has everything needed to select and call it correctly.

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% for the single 'location' parameter (city name or slug), so the schema carries the parameter semantics. The description adds no syntax, slug-format, or disambiguation detail beyond what the schema states; baseline 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?

Opens with a specific noun-phrase resource ('Snapshot of a destination') and enumerates the concrete payload: hotel counts, average Comfort Score, median price, strengths/weaknesses, best neighbourhoods, suitable travel styles. It also names the sibling it is not, so an agent can distinguish it from search_hotels and list_cities without opening a schema.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('when the user is choosing a destination or an area') and an explicit alternative with a concrete counter-example ('quiet hotels in Bangkok' -> call search_hotels directly). Both the when and the when-not are stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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