Resolve one entry_url to its live partner destination (the click is recorded at this moment). Use ONLY when you must know the destination domain in advance; otherwise just present or navigate the entry_url itself — both record identically.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| entry_url | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations, the description discloses the click-recording side effect and that resolving vs. presenting both record identically. This clarifies non-idempotence and expected side effects, though it omits failure cases or auth/rate limits.
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 with no filler; the core purpose and side effect are front-loaded, and the conditional guidance is concise.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, when to use, and the alternative. The return behavior is implied by 'resolve to its live partner destination,' which is sufficient.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the entry_url is resolved to a live partner destination and that the destination domain is the key information sought. It doesn't provide URL format details, but the single self-named parameter is otherwise clear.
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?
Description specifies a concrete verb ('resolve') and resource ('one entry_url') and states the outcome ('live partner destination'). It distinguishes itself from the alternative of presenting/navigating the entry_url directly.
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?
Explicitly states the only condition for use ('when you must know the destination domain in advance') and says what to do otherwise. Names the alternative approach and notes both record identically.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct domain aspect: planning, booking, snow conditions, resort info, and costs. Even closely related tools like booking_options vs open_booking vs choose_path are clearly separated by their roles in the trip lifecycle. No two tools appear to do the same thing.
Names mostly use a noun or verb_noun style in lowercase, but there is a mix of forms (e.g., 'find_resorts' vs 'conditions' vs 'where_to_ski'). The pattern is still predictable and readable, with only minor stylistic deviations.
16 tools is slightly above the ideal sweet spot, but the domain is broad (ski trip planning, conditions, booking, media, costs) and each tool clearly earns its place. It feels well-scoped without being bloated.
Covers the full trip lifecycle: research (plan_trip, trip_status, tell_skym), selection (choose_path), booking (booking_options, open_booking), live conditions (conditions, daily_snow, snow_forecast, webcams, where_to_ski), resort details (find_resorts, resort_media, getting_there), and costs (trip_costs). No obvious dead ends or missing operations.