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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the freshness signal ('live sheet'), which is genuine extra context, but discloses nothing about auth needs, staleness window, or rate limits.

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 the 'full live sheet' framing and followed by the actionable directive. Each listed field earns its place as return-value documentation. Slightly dense enumeration, but no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully compensates by enumerating the returned fields (price tiers, child price, dated periods, duration, schedule, meeting point, inclusions, park fee, page link). Combined with annotations covering safety, this is nearly complete for a single-param read tool.

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 'experience' parameter is documented there with its 'destination/slug' format and origin (search_experiences). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 for schema-driven parameters is correct.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Full live sheet of one tour') and enumerates the exact content it returns, which implicitly separates it from the list-oriented search_experiences. It stops short of naming a sibling explicitly, so it does not fully earn a 5.

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 a clear imperative usage condition: 'Call it before quoting any price.' That tells the agent exactly when this tool is required. However, it names no alternatives (e.g., search_experiences) and lists no exclusions, so it falls short of the explicit when/when-not bar for a 5.

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