Guest reviews, including unapproved ones by default (same as the panel). Pass approved_only to match what is actually published on the booking page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| apartment_id | No | Restrict to one apartment. Must belong to this account. | |
| approved_only | No | Only published (moderator-approved) reviews. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining the default includes unapproved reviews and that approved_only aligns output with the booking page. This goes beyond structured fields.
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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The key default behavior is front-loaded, and the parameter guidance follows naturally.
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 simple read-only list tool with fully documented parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke it 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by clarifying the default state and the practical effect of approved_only, giving the agent semantic understanding beyond the schema text.
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 and resource: listing guest reviews. It also clarifies the default scope (including unapproved ones) and contrasts with published reviews, which distinguishes this tool from what one might assume about a review list. Clear and unambiguous.
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 clear context on default behavior and instructs the agent to pass approved_only to match published reviews. It does not name alternatives, but no direct sibling reviews tool exists, and the guidance is sufficient for correct use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.