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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds value beyond them by disclosing the auth requirement (NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN) and the read-before-write workflow rationale. It adds real context rather than restating the annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what it returns, when to call it, and the auth prerequisite. The returned content is front-loaded with no filler.

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 single-parameter read-only getter with no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields (title, description, listed status), names the auth token, and states the workflow context. That is nearly complete, with the only minor gap being a fuller comparison against sibling getters.

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% and the stayId parameter already documents itself as the EntryID with a pointer to getMyStays. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 for fully covered schemas 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?

Specific verb ("Get") plus precise resource ("current title, description, and listed status for one of your Stays"). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling list tool getMyStays and from getStayByID. An agent understands the exact content returned without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to call this before updateStayDetail and explains why (avoiding accidental overwrites), which is strong when-to-use guidance tied to a named sibling. It lacks any when-not-to-use or distinction from getMyStays/getStayByID, so it falls short of a full 5.

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