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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavior: it queries all twelve properties live at call time, applies each property's live minimum stay (1 night for single/double, 7 for studio), returns nightly rates for sub-week stays, and refuses 30+ night stays up front.

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?

Front-loaded and answer-first, but wordy and narratively styled with all-caps emphasis (CAPACITY, not vacancy). The 30-night cap is stated twice in consecutive sentences, and the minimum-stay sentence is dense enough to slow parsing.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry return expectations, and it partially does (availability per property, nightly rates for sub-week stays). It is silent on the response shape for studios, multi-week stays, or properties with no vacancy.

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 100%, so this is baseline 3 territory, but the description adds the semantics behind the fields: omitting dates means tonight, and roomtype ties to the differentiated minimum-stay rules per room category. That meaning goes beyond the terse schema strings.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: live room availability across the twelve named New Leaf properties in Twin Falls for given nights. It also implicitly separates itself from rate feeds by explaining that published feeds carry capacity, not vacancy, so an agent can tell it apart from get_rates and quote_stay.

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 clear conditions: supply dates, call without dates for tonight, and a hard exclusion (stays over 30 nights are refused). It does not explicitly route the agent to siblings such as quote_stay for a firm price or list_properties for inventory descriptions.

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