estimate_nc_venue_costEstimate site fee, food and beverage, and total venue cost by NC region, guest count, day, and season.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | Yes | ||
| region | Yes | ||
| season | Yes | ||
| guest_count | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds some behavioral context by stating the tool produces estimates for site fee, F&B, and total cost, but it does not disclose important traits such as whether results are approximate ranges, currency, or based on historical data.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrases. Every clause earns its place by naming both the output categories and the key input dimensions.
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 no output schema, the description should clarify what the returned estimate looks like (e.g., number, range, currency, breakdown), but it does not. It also omits assumptions or caveats about the estimation methodology. This is sparser than needed for a four-parameter estimator with no output schema.
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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only repeats the parameter dimensions ('region, guest count, day, and season') without adding meaning beyond the property names. The schema's enums provide value constraints, yet the description does not clarify semantics like units, formats, or interpretation of the inputs.
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?
Uses a specific verb ('Estimate') and resource ('NC venue cost') and clearly names the outputs: site fee, food and beverage, and total cost. The description does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like build_nc_wedding_budget, though the name and focus on venue cost make it reasonably distinct.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as build_nc_wedding_budget or search_nc_wedding_directory. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.
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 covers a distinct step: budgeting, venue cost estimation, vendor discovery and detail retrieval, marriage license lookup, and vendor contact. Even though search and get both involve vendors, one is for discovery while the other fetches a specific listing's details.
All tool names use a verb-first snake_case format and most include an NC wedding qualifier, such as build_nc_wedding_budget and search_nc_wedding_directory. The one exception, request_vendor_contact, still follows the same verb_noun pattern, so there is no meaningful convention break.
Six tools is a well-scoped size for a wedding planning guide. Each tool addresses a necessary planning action without unnecessary redundancy or expansion.
The toolset covers the core wedding planning workflow: budget creation, venue cost estimation, vendor discovery and detail retrieval, vendor contact, and marriage license rules. There are no obvious dead ends since search leads to get, and get leads to contact.