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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful scope framing by explicitly ruling out availability/rates/booking and clarifying that only descriptive information is returned, though it says nothing about error or fallback behavior (that lives in the schema).

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?

Three short paragraphs, front-loaded with the core purpose, then discovery usage, then the exclusion note. No sentence is filler and each adds a distinct constraint.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers both invocation modes plus the negative scope. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly 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 description coverage is 100%, so hotel_id, language and amenity_id are fully documented in the schema, including enum values, the French fallback, and the unknown-ID error. The description only restates the hotel_id omission semantics, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the structured data, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (return) and resource (amenities), and crisply splits the two modes: one hotel's amenities vs. the chain's global catalogue when hotel_id is omitted. An agent can distinguish it from get_hotel_details and get_hotel_photos immediately.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('Call it without hotel_id to discover the valid amenity IDs to use in search_hotels'), naming the sibling that consumes the output. It also draws a clear negative boundary: no availability, rates or booking.

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