booking_flights_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly says 'Search' and 'Returns normalized... offers', which implies a non-mutating operation and describes the output shape at a high level. However, it does not detail any potential side effects, pagination, or what 'normalized' entails, leaving some behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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 concise sentences that cover the core purpose and the primary return behavior with no unnecessary words. Every phrase adds value, making it an efficient example of front-loaded, minimal documentation.

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?

Given 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides a solid high-level overview: what is searched (Booking.com flights), the trip types supported, and the nature of the output. It leaves out detailed explanation of the 'normalized' format or relationship between type and return date, but the schema covers the mandatory/conditional parameters, so the tool remains usable.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the context that the search is 'between two Booking.com flight-search locations', reinforcing the meaning of the 'from' and 'to' parameters. It does not add further parameter-specific details 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 uses the specific verb 'Search' with the resource 'Booking.com flights' and clearly states the output: normalized round-trip or one-way flight offers between two locations. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like expedia_flights_search or booking_hotel_detail.

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 provides clear context of when to use the tool (to search Booking.com flights) and indicates the tool returns offers between two locations. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives, but the focus on Booking.com flights and the return type makes the usage clear.

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