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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description strengthens these by disclosing background fetching, pending > 0, and the need to call again after ~3 seconds. It also explains what fields are returned, including is_tracked and track_page_url, without contradicting 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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, return contents, differentiation, async behavior, and defaults are all packed compactly. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and remains readable despite carrying substantial behavioral detail.

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 read-only calendar tool with a full input schema and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers return values, pending behavior, defaults, and the distinction from related tools. Nothing essential for correct invocation 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 coverage is 100%, so most parameter meaning is already provided. The description adds value by giving the default window (28 days), 1 night, and 2 adults context, and by clarifying the relationship between agoda_hotel_id and search_hotels. This goes beyond the schema without duplicating it.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('what one hotel costs on Agoda for each check-in date in a window'), clearly distinguishes itself as a date cross-section rather than a time series, and references the source of agoda_hotel_id (search_hotels). It differentiates well from siblings like get_price_history and track_hotel_price.

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 description explicitly frames the use case ('what if I move my dates' view), states that this is not a time series, and directs users to track_hotel_price when they want to keep watching a date. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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