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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: data is 'public', it includes 'metadata extracted from the page bootstrap when present', and it explicitly does not return individual review text. It stops short of describing pagination or response shape, but for a single-item read that is minor.

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, zero waste: the primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by scoping caveats and sibling routing. Every clause earns its place.

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 tool with an output schema and safety annotations already covering returns and permissions, the description supplies all remaining context an agent needs, including the key negative (no individual review text). Nothing material is missing.

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 there is only one required parameter, so the schema already documents the `id`. The description only restates that the lookup is 'by listing `id`', adding no format or constraint detail beyond the schema. 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 and resource ('Fetch public Airbnb room details'), plus the exact scope ('by listing `id`') and what is aggregated ('rating/count'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming airbnb_search, airbnb_room_calendar, and airbnb_room_reviews, so an agent can tell them apart without opening any 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 routes the agent to alternatives with their distinct purposes: airbnb_search to discover IDs, airbnb_room_calendar for availability, airbnb_room_reviews for review entries. This is precise when-to-use-which guidance rather than vague context.

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