Search Beaches Resorts (family all-inclusive). Returns co-branded URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| best_for | No | families, kids, waterpark, beach | |
| destination | No | Turks and Caicos or Jamaica | |
| max_results | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the specific detail that the tool returns co-branded URLs, but it does not mention potential limitations, authentication requirements, or how results are structured, leaving some ambiguity about the tool's behavior.
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, front-loaded with the action and scope. It wastes no words and immediately communicates the tool's purpose and return value.
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?
Given the 3-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides minimal context about the returned URLs and doesn't clarify relationships with sibling tools like get_resort_booking_url. However, it does state the return type, which is adequate for a simple search tool.
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?
The input schema already describes best_for and destination, but max_results lacks any description. The tool description does not add meaning for any parameter, leaving max_results undocumented and failing to compensate for the 67% schema coverage.
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 clearly states 'Search Beaches Resorts' with the qualifier 'family all-inclusive' and mentions returning co-branded URLs. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_sandals_resorts, which targets a different resort brand.
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 implies use for family all-inclusive beach resort searches via the qualifier 'family all-inclusive'. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like get_sandals_beaches_deals, though the context is relatively clear.
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.
Several tools overlap in purpose (find_cruise vs get_cruise_booking_info, and search_sandals_resorts vs get_resort_booking_url vs get_sandals_beaches_deals). However, the descriptions include explicit guidance on when to prefer each tool, which helps an agent disambiguate. Still, the catch-all request_pixie_quote overlaps with all specialized planning tools.
All tool names use lowercase snake_case with a verb-first pattern (find, get, search, plan, request). There is some inconsistency between 'find' and 'search' for similar operations, but the pattern is generally predictable.
12 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range for a multi-product travel agency server. Each tool covers a distinct product line or function, and none feel redundant enough to remove.
The tool set covers the major travel products Pixie Vacations offers: general cruises, Virgin Voyages, river cruises, Sandals/Beaches resorts, Disney World, honeymoons, and general quote requests. There is a clear path for booking online (via URLs) or via human agent (quote form). No obvious dead ends or missing core functionality.