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

Beyond the annotations, the description explains the asynchronous pricing model, the pending status, the 24-hour quote window, and what a firm offer contains. This is exactly the behavioral context needed for a non-idempotent, open-world write-shaped request that does not itself reserve or charge.

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 front-loaded with "WRITE" and then moves directly through purpose, async behavior, polling, and booking implications. Every sentence contributes either selection guidance or behavioral clarity, with no wasted framing.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain the return behavior, and it does: a quote id, pending status, quote_due_by, polling via get_availability_quote, and the contents of a firm offer. It also covers the key non-effects of the call, making it complete for an agent to invoke and interpret 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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds useful routing context for property_id, but does not add syntax or meaning for dates, adults, or children beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score 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 states a specific verb and resource: asking the Virtuoso advisor to price a stay at a Virtuoso hotel. It also distinguishes the call from search_trips (source of property_id) and get_availability_quote (the polling step), so an agent can identify its role without opening other schemas.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool and how to continue afterward: obtain property_id from search_trips, expect an asynchronous quote, and poll get_availability_quote. It also clarifies that no reservation or charge occurs, which prevents an agent from treating it as a booking action.

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