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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful semantic scope beyond that: it clarifies this returns configuration objects rather than a computed price, which prevents misinterpreting the output. Auth/rate-limit behavior is not addressed, keeping it from a 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and immediately followed by the boundary. Every clause earns its place, and there is no filler or repetition of the title.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers the key ambiguity (config vs. computed quote) plus the alternative source for base rates. It is essentially complete for a one-parameter read tool; only minor pagination/ordering behavior is unstated.

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 the single parameter already documents 'Restrict to one apartment. Must belong to this account.' The description adds no syntax or format detail for apartment_id, so the baseline 3 applies for a schema that does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific resource (seasonal overrides, minimum-stay rules, extra fees) and explicitly frames it as 'the pricing configuration, not a computed quote'. It distinguishes itself from sibling content by pointing at list_apartments for the base nightly rate, so an agent can pick it apart from any quote-style tool.

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?

It gives clear context for what this tool yields and explicitly redirects to list_apartments when the agent wants the base nightly rate, which is real routing guidance. It stops short of stating when the tool should not be used at all (e.g. no exclusions around accounts or missing pricing).

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