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

Goes well past the read-only/idempotent annotations: discloses availability filtering (only properties free every night), result ordering (cheapest first, exact town matches first), pagination, all returned fields including deposit handling rules, the partner_results fallback and its commercial/terms implications, and a privacy note that only location text is sent to Trip.com.

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?

A single dense paragraph with the core purpose front-loaded and the partner fallback placed after the primary behavior. It is long, but nearly every clause carries operational information; the partner-hotels section could be tightened slightly.

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 15 parameters and no output schema, the description still tells the agent what each result contains (nightly price, total_price, cancellation policy, room counts, deposits) and what the fallback shape looks like. Nothing essential to calling or interpreting the call is missing.

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 73%, so most parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces overall filter behavior (price, availability, whole homes, property types) but adds little per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema strings already say, and says nothing about page, limit, guests or min_beds.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Find independent stays bookable direct on Bookd'), enumerates the property categories covered, and scopes it to location plus dates. An agent can distinguish this from check_availability or get_property without inspecting any schema.

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 read-only nature ('nothing is booked or held') and explicitly forbids using request_booking for partner results, which is a concrete when-not rule. It does not, however, say when to prefer check_availability, get_property or request_booking for actual Bookd properties, so routing to the other siblings is left implicit.

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