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

Annotations already cover read-only/safe behavior, so credit goes to the added context: results are draft-catalog price references rather than live availability, which materially affects how an agent presents the data. Still missing pagination behavior for limit/offset and any note on ordering or result volume.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, filter dimensions front-loaded before the price-reliability caveat. Every clause carries information.

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?

No output schema and low parameter coverage, but the description establishes source catalog, filterable facets, and the crucial limitation on what the returned prices mean — enough to call it responsibly. Residual gaps are the unexplained 'query'/'offset'/'limit' semantics.

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 only 17%, so the description must compensate. It explains category and menu examples but omits 'celebrations' from the category list, and lists venue as 'Costa/Vuelo' while the enum also allows Spa, Hotel and Extras — a misleading partial enumeration. The 'query' parameter is never explained.

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+resource: 'Search the full Casona Signature v18 draft service catalog' with listed filter dimensions. It does not name sibling tools, but the note that results are 'COP price references, not live availability' implicitly separates it from search_live_room_quotes.

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 'not live availability' caveat hints that live pricing requires a different tool, but the alternative (search_live_room_quotes) and the quoting path (draft_experience_quote) are never named. No explicit when-not or prerequisite guidance.

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