Google Hotels Scraper (Google Travel): Prices on Booking Sites

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

Annotations only declare readOnly and openWorld, so the description carries the burden of disclosing cost behavior: pay-per-result pricing with explicit rates (run start $0.003, hotel $0.002, booking-site $0.003) and the fact that includeBookingSites adds a billed extra page per hotel. This is genuinely useful operational context beyond the annotations, though it omits rate-limit/runtime or failure behavior.

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?

Three dense sentences that front-load what is returned and then the booking-site option and cost model. No filler, though the pricing sentence is appended rather abruptly rather than integrated into the flow.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully names the returned fields (price per night/total, rating, stars) and the cost model, and all 10 parameters are documented in the schema. It could be stronger on pagination/volume behavior and what happens with partial inputs, but it is adequate for this 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%, so the schema already explains adults, nights, currency, dates, sortBy, minRating, locations and hotels in detail; the description adds little parameter-specific meaning. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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+resource (hotel prices from Google Hotels) with the scope of what is returned: price per night and total, rating, stars, and optionally per-booking-site prices. It is easily distinguished from siblings like search_flights and find_ryanair_fares, which cover air travel rather than lodging.

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 usage through includeBookingSites ('the price of each hotel on every booking site') and notes it is 'Always on for tracked hotels', but it never says when to choose this tool over an alternative or when not to use it. There is no exclusion or prerequisite guidance, only conditional context for the booking-site option.

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