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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and closed-world, and the description adds substantial behavioral context: one row per boat/week, best-week deduplication when no date window is given, matching count and next_offset paging, and the fields returned. This is a strong disclosure for a search tool.

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 dense but front-loaded, moving from core search semantics to sorting, paging, edge-case behavior, and return fields without filler. Every sentence adds useful information for an agent invoking a complex search tool.

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 12 optional parameters, paging, and date-dependent deduplication, the description gives enough behavioral context to call the tool correctly. An output schema exists, and the description still summarizes key return fields and paging mechanics, so no critical gap remains.

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 already high at 83%, so the schema carries most parameter meaning. The description still adds useful semantic context by mapping filters to departure month/date window, boat type, cabins, berths/group size, discount and whole-boat price, and by explaining how sort and next_offset should be used.

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 a specific search over discounted boats, including row granularity and supported filters. It distinguishes the resource from generic boat lookup, but does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings such as compare_boats or prices_by_month.

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 implies usage by explaining filtering, sorting, and paging behavior, including the special case where a month/date window is omitted. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over alternatives like compare_boats or is_good_deal.

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