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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description earns credit for going beyond them: address rounding when the host keeps it private, fixed amenity ids plus labels, and the meaning of bookable:false. It still doesn't cover pagination or return format, but the added domain context is substantive.

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 return-field inventory leads, followed by two compact sentences on bookable:false and bookingMode. Dense but each sentence carries useful information with little waste.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully enumerates what a single-property fetch returns, and annotations handle the safety profile. Behavior for the key edge cases (private address, unbookable listing, booking modes) is disclosed, leaving only minor gaps like pagination/error behavior.

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%, so the schema already documents both slug and locale (including the enum and default). The description adds no further parameter syntax or format detail, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 names a specific resource — a single holiday rental — and enumerates the fields it returns (capacity, amenities, house rules, check-in/out, cancellation policy, photos, from-price). It clearly implies a single-property detail lookup, but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like search_stays or get_quote.

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 when-not caveat ('bookable: false ... do not quote or prepare a checkout for it'), which steers the agent away from create_checkout/get_quote for unbookable listings. However, it does not say when to reach for get_property versus search_stays or check_availability, so usage is only implied.

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