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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the data scope (seasonal prices, validity, minimum stay, tax rates, laundry package), but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as response format, pagination, or any limits, which are not covered by annotations either.

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 a single concise sentence in German, front-loading the core content ('Saisonpreise pro Nacht') and enumerating the additional attributes without redundancy or filler. Every word contributes to clarifying the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity—no parameters, no output schema, and clear read-only annotations—the description covers all key aspects: per-night rates, validity period, minimum stay, visitor's tax, and laundry package. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand what this tool provides and select it appropriately.

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?

The tool has zero parameters in its input schema, so schema description coverage is 100%. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameter semantics beyond the schema's empty property set.

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 identifies the tool as providing seasonal per-night prices with validity period, minimum stay, visitor's tax rates, and laundry package. While it lacks an explicit verb, the resource and its scope are specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like preis_berechnen (price calculation).

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 does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as preis_berechnen or verfuegbarkeit_pruefen. There is no explicit use-case guidance, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name and context.

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