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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds useful content scope (apartment list, images, weekly availability) and notes the tool is for public accommodations. No contradictions. Lacks explicit mention of return format but the description carries reasonable transparency.

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 three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: what it returns, when to use it, and when to use an alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return contents (apartment list, images, weekly availability) and usage context. Slightly more detail on 'weekly availability' or response structure could push it higher, but it is substantially complete.

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%, with the accommodationId parameter documented as 'Accommodation id from search results or list_accommodations.' The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so baseline 3 is 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 clearly states it returns accommodation-level context, apartment list, images, detail information, and weekly availability for one public accommodation. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly positioning it after search results and contrasting with search_apartments.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this after search results to inspect all apartments belonging to one accommodation' and 'For price and bookability comparison for a specific week, prefer search_apartments with weekId' clearly states when to use and when to prefer an alternative.

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