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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavioral context beyond structured data: the implicit stay dates default to tomorrow for three nights, and results carry live prices and distance. It omits pagination/limit behavior, but this is solid added context.

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 tight sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the return summary. Efficient, though the second sentence could be slightly denser.

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 helpfully summarizes return values, and since no parameters are required the tool is callable as-is. However, for an 8-parameter tool with zero schema documentation, the description leaves too many knobs (radius units, currency, residency, limit) unexplained.

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 0% across 8 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It hints at place and coordinate inputs but says nothing about limit, radius, currency, residency, or country_code, leaving most parameters semantically opaque.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List hotels near a named place or coordinate') and names the inputs that drive the search. It is clear on its own, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling search_hotels_by_geo, which sounds like it does the same geo-based lookup.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative tool is named, despite several plausible siblings (search_hotels, search_hotels_by_geo, get_nearby_places). Usage is only implied by the word 'nearby'.

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