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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by scoping the payload (content only, no prices) and pointing to the rates tool, though it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or failure modes for invalid hotel codes.

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, no filler. The content inventory is front-loaded and the pricing exclusion/routing follows immediately, so the agent gets the scope and the boundary in one pass.

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 burden of describing return values, and it lists the returned fields explicitly. Combined with 100% schema coverage and annotations covering safety, an agent has everything needed to invoke this correctly.

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 both parameters (hotel_code, image_size) are already documented in the schema. The description mentions a photo gallery by category, which loosely relates to image_size, but adds 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 resource and enumerates exactly what is returned (address, description, amenities, check-in/out times, room count, photo gallery). It also names the sibling it is not (rates come from sabre_hotel_rates_coded), so an agent can distinguish it from sabre_hotel_rates_coded 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?

The second sentence explicitly routes pricing lookups to sabre_hotel_rates_coded, and the schema notes the hotel_code comes from sabre_hotel_search, implying the correct call ordering. It stops short of an explicit when-to-use statement or exclusions for the other siblings, but the alternative is named clearly.

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