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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the backing system (WBE) and the shape of what comes back (room types, times, contacts). It stops short of noting pagination, permissions, or partial-result behavior.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The data payload is front-loaded and the sibling disambiguation comes second, which is the right ordering for a fetch 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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately by naming the data categories returned. It does not address optionality of fields, error cases, or whether all hotels return every field, which is a minor remaining gap for a read tool.

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% and the single optional 'language' enum is fully documented in the schema, including the note that codes, times and prices are language-independent. The description adds no parameter syntax or semantics beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb (Fetch) plus resource (hotel operational data) and it enumerates the concrete payload: room types with abbreviation codes (roomId), check-in/out times, contact information. It also explicitly names the sibling it is not (get_fact_sheet), so an agent can route without opening 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?

States the alternative and the exact condition that selects it: 'For rich marketing descriptions, use get_fact_sheet instead.' That is the primary confusion pair for this tool and it is resolved explicitly rather than left to inference.

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