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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds meaningful context: the value is displayed on the Stay, not editable via MCP or host UI, and requires the NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN. These details clarify the tool's behavior and constraints beyond what annotations alone provide.

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, well-structured sentence that packs in the action, scope, read-only status, edit restrictions, and auth requirement without wordiness. Every clause adds 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?

For a simple parameterless read-only options-listing tool, the description fully covers purpose, scope, field, read-only nature, edit restriction, and token requirement. With annotations handling safety traits and no output schema expected, the description is complete.

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 tool has 0 parameters and the schema is empty, so the baseline of 4 per rubric applies. The description references businessModelId as output scope, but no parameter documentation is needed. No additional parameter semantics could be added.

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 the tool lists valid values for a Stay's listing/business model, with the specific field businessModelId. This distinguishes it from sibling options tools like getRoomTypeOptions or getStayTypeOptions by naming the exact domain and field.

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 usage for read-only lookup of valid business model values and explicitly notes the field is not editable via MCP or host UI. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions, so it falls one point short of full guidance.

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