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

With readOnly/destructive annotations already covering the safety profile, the description still adds real context: it requires the user's Cotlet API key with app access, notes that occupancy/RevPAR/room-night counts exist only when searching by stay date, and explains that closed room nights are excluded from the occupancy base. It stops short of return format or pagination details.

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?

Purpose and constraints are front-loaded, but the metric list is enumerated twice ('room nights, occupancy, ADR, RevPAR, length of stay, lead time and cancellations' then again as 'total, closed, occupied and unoccupied room nights, occupancy, ... ADR, RevPAR...'), which is redundant. It is informative but not tight.

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 report tool with no output schema, the description usefully spells out the return metrics, the date-range requirement, the search-mode dependency, and the auth requirement. Nothing critical is missing, though it could note whether results are paginated or aggregated.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters (baseline 3). The description adds meaning beyond it by tying search_by to which metrics become available ('Occupancy, RevPAR and the room night counts exist only when searching by stay date'), which the schema enum alone does not convey. include_tax is left unexplained.

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 verb and resource by naming the exact report ('Runs the Front Desk Statistics report') and enumerating the metrics produced (room nights, occupancy, ADR, RevPAR, length of stay, lead time, cancellations). This is far more specific than a generic 'get statistics' and lets an agent identify it apart from siblings like get_booking_performance.

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?

Usage is only implied: it needs a date range and it hints that stay-date vs booked-on search changes what is returned. It never states when to prefer this over siblings (get_booking_performance, export_report) or what the prerequisites are beyond the API key mention.

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