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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context about result contents ('stadium proximity information, match schedules, and expected demand surge data') and the geographic scope, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Four tightly written sentences: action, return contents, use trigger, and supported cities. No filler or redundancy; key information is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 read-only search tool with 5 params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use, supported city values, and return data categories. Combined with the schema's parameter details and read-only annotations, this is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke 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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by enumerating all 11 valid host cities, which is not fully captured by the schema's 'e.g.' examples. This helps the agent select a valid city value.

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 opens with 'Search for vacation rentals in FIFA World Cup 2026 host cities' and specifies unique return content: 'stadium proximity information, match schedules, and expected demand surge data.' This clearly distinguishes it from generic sibling tools like search_vacation_rentals.

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?

It provides an explicit trigger: 'Use this when a traveler is looking for accommodation for World Cup 2026 matches' and lists the 11 supported host cities. However, it does not name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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