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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds the auth requirement (NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN) and the read-before-write role, both of which are real behavioral context. It does not discuss pagination or failure modes, but for a single-record read that is a minor gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the returned fields, then the usage rule and auth note — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The long field enumeration is dense but each item is load-bearing since there is no output schema.

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 compensates by naming the return fields, plus it covers the single required parameter and the token requirement. An agent has everything needed to call this correctly and understand what comes back.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema coverage is 100% — the schema itself explains stayId is the EntryID and points to getMyStays. The description adds no syntax, format, or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get a Stay's contact/owner/manager details and social media links') and then enumerates the exact fields returned (owner/manager/booking contacts, host display name, seven social platforms). That enumeration functionally distinguishes it from adjacent members like getMyStayDetail or getMyStayOrganisationalData without needing to name them.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing guidance: 'Call this before updateStayContacts so the agent knows current values,' which both names the sibling alternative and states the trigger condition. It stops short of a full when/when-not treatment (e.g., using it purely for read/reporting purposes is not addressed).

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