accor_property

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the data is static, public metadata, and explicitly lists what is excluded, which manages agent expectations well. It does not mention error behavior, rate limits, or caching, but for a simple read-only metadata lookup this is a minor gap.

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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. The first sentence establishes the resource and scope, and the second efficiently lists inclusions and exclusions, making the tool's behavior easy to parse.

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 one-parameter, read-only metadata tool, the description is largely complete: it describes what is returned and what is not. It lacks explicit detail on invalid hotel code handling or the exact output structure, but the inclusion/exclusion list covers most of what an agent needs to 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?

The schema already documents hotel_code as a four-character Accor hotel code with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level guidance, so it meets the baseline but does not go beyond the schema.

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 clearly states that this tool returns static public metadata for a single Accor hotel code and enumerates the included fields (name, brand, city/country, amenities, check-in/check-out times) and excluded fields (booking, rates, rooms, reviews, contacts, precise location). The singular 'one Accor hotel code' scope distinguishes it from broader Accor search and catalog tools.

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 description implies the tool should be used when you already have a specific hotel code and need static metadata, rather than searching for hotels. However, it never explicitly names alternative tools such as accor_search or accor_catalog_hotels, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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