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

Annotations already assert readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces the non-mutating nature ('nothing is booked or held') rather than contradicting it. It also adds the underlying endpoint and the shape of the result (total plus base rate, cleaning fee, taxes, discounts), which is useful beyond the annotation.

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 tight sentences: purpose and non-mutation caveat are front-loaded, and the endpoint detail is appended without crowding the core message. 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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned components (total, base rate, cleaning fee, taxes, discounts). Combined with 100% schema coverage and the readOnly annotation, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this tool.

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 all six parameters (including markup and reservationCouponId) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning such as the semantics of markup or coupon applicability, so 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?

Specific verb (calculate) plus resource (price of a stay) with scope stated: total price and component breakdown. It clearly distinguishes itself from booking siblings by declaring 'A calculation only: nothing is booked or held.'

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 'nothing is booked or held' line gives clear context that this is for quoting rather than committing, which implicitly routes the agent away from hostaway_create_reservation. No sibling is named explicitly, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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