Retrieve Booking.com hotel details by hotel ID, including rating, facilities, highlights, house rules, cover photos, and rooms with photos.
Booking.com hotel detail. Returns a Booking.com hotel's core detail page: rating, facilities, highlights, house rules, cover photos, and rooms with their own photos.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hotel_id | Yes | Booking.com hotel id, from a prior search's property id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It lists what is returned and frames it as a 'core detail page', which clarifies scope but does not disclose limitations (e.g., 'does not include reviews' or 'requires prior search') or operational details like data freshness.
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 that front-load the purpose and enumerate contents without unnecessary words. Every part adds value.
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?
The description lists the main return components, which is helpful since there is no output schema. It is fairly complete for a simple single-parameter retrieval tool, though 'core detail page' is slightly vague and could explicitly mention what is NOT included.
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 does not add parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the schema already fully documents hotel_id.
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 the tool returns a Booking.com hotel's core detail page, enumerating specific content (rating, facilities, highlights, house rules, cover photos, rooms with photos). This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from sibling tools like booking_search and booking_reviews.
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 does not explicitly say when to use this tool vs alternatives. The schema hint ('from a prior search's property id') implies usage after booking_search, but the description itself lacks explicit guidance or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.