Vote UP or DOWN on a trip item. Only available for IDEA, RESEARCHED, and SHORTLISTED items. Voting the same way twice removes your vote.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vote | Yes | Vote direction | |
| itemId | Yes | Trip item ID |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations by disclosing the toggle behavior: 'Voting the same way twice removes your vote.' This is important state-changing behavior that is not inferable from readOnlyHint or destructiveHint alone.
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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary action, then immediately provides the key eligibility constraint and toggle behavior. Every sentence contributes essential information.
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 simple two-parameter tool with no nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the operation, eligibility, and toggle behavior. It does not describe the response payload or error cases, but these are not required for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.
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%, with 'Vote direction' and 'Trip item ID' already documented in the input schema. The description does not add significant extra meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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?
The description states a specific action ('Vote UP or DOWN on a trip item') with a clear resource and direction. It clearly differentiates this tool from sibling tools like trip_item_add, trip_item_update, and trip_item_delete by describing the exact voting semantics.
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 explicitly states when the tool is available: 'Only available for IDEA, RESEARCHED, and SHORTLISTED items.' This gives an agent a clear precondition and implies when not to use the tool, which is strong usage guidance for this simple tool.
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.
Most tools are clearly separated by resource type and action, making selection. The main ambiguity is between trip_item_add and trip_transport_add, since trip_item_add lists transport as a category but trip_transport_add explicitly says to always use it instead for transport.
The naming pattern is highly consistent: trip_<resource>_<action>. Minor deviations exist with bare verbs like search and fetch, and trip_review uses a verb-only style, but these are easy to understand within the larger pattern.
37 tools is a large surface that exceeds the typical coherence threshold. While the domain is broad, the count makes the server feel heavy and harder for an agent to navigate compared to a more focused toolset.
The toolset provides strong CRUD/lifecycle coverage across trips, items, notes, tasks, locations, collaborators, shares, and transport, plus review and search capabilities. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct collaborator add, no location update, and no item-level comment delete, but these are workable.