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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint; the description adds substantive behavior: it returns catalog entries (name, address, stars, rating, review count), returns no prices, resolves the city to the best match, and surfaces other_city_matches for multi-city ambiguity. It stops short of auth or rate-limit context, so it is not a full 5.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and the flow, and every sentence carries information (return fields, price exclusion, language support, city_id fallback). It is somewhat dense and long for a 4-param lookup, which keeps it from a 5.

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 carries the return-value burden and does so — listing the returned fields and the other_city_matches fallback — plus the typical call chain. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly 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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantics beyond the schema: accepted languages (Korean/Japanese/Chinese/English), that city is resolved to the best catalog match, that city_id overrides city, and that a hotel name alone still requires a city.

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+resource ('resolve a hotel to the agoda_hotel_id') and explicitly disclaims what it is not ('not a hotel search engine'), naming siblings track_hotel_price and list_hotel_deals. An agent can distinguish this from list_hotel_deals without opening either 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('lookup step, not a hotel search engine... for prices, track the hotel or use list_hotel_deals') and an end-to-end flow (search_hotels → track_hotel_price → get_price_history). Alternatives and the condition that selects them are named.

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