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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: the returned link must be copied exactly as-is and never reconstructed or abbreviated. It also implicitly indicates this is a read-only detail retrieval by specifying the output contents. No contradictions with annotations (none present).

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 concise: one sentence listing the output fields, followed by a single impactful IMPORTANT instruction. Every sentence earns its place, and the key warning is front-loaded with emphasis. No redundant or extraneous text.

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 detail tool with no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the expected return fields. It covers the essential information an agent needs to interpret the response. It lacks specifics on error handling or edge cases, but those are not critical for this simple 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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single required parameter 'id' with its type and description (UUID or slug). The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it returns all details of a specific offer, enumerating the exact contents (description, highlights, hotel, included excursions, savings, link). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'cerca_offerte' (searching offers) by focusing on a single offer's details.

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 phrase 'Tutti i dettagli di una specifica offerta' provides clear context for when to use the tool (when a specific offer ID is known). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous. The IMPORTANT instruction about the link adds a practical usage guideline.

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