hemmabo_search_properties

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

While the annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, the description adds substantial behavioral context: it states that the tool is discovery-only, that it returns live availability and host-source pricing (not final prices), and that capacity misses are excluded while date-unavailable matches are returned separately in unavailableMatches with up to three alternative windows. It also explains how region and country match semantics differ. This goes well beyond the annotations, providing an agent the full behavioral picture.

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 dense and single-paragraph, but every sentence serves a purpose. It flows logically: purpose, when to use, follow-up requirement, exclusions, return details, and parameter behavior. While it could be split into bullet points for clarity, it is not verbose and information is front-loaded with the main purpose. The length is justified given the tool's complexity, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 complex search tool with 5 parameters, an output schema, and nuanced behavior (filtering, availability, alternative matches), the description is remarkably complete. It explains the return fields (propertyId, host domain, live availability, host-source pricing, capacity), the handling of capacity and date-unavailable properties, and the interaction between region and country. The existence of an output schema means return value details need not be repeated. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 input schema already documents each parameter with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explaining how parameters combine as one filter (guests with checkIn/checkOut range), that checkIn is strictly before checkOut, that region matches broadly against region/city/country while country matches only the country field, and that omitting both spans all properties. It also clarifies the role of guests in capacity and pricing tiers. This supplements the schema meaningfully, though not every parameter need is covered beyond what's in 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 states the exact verb ('Search'), the resource ('available vacation rental properties'), and the criteria (location and travel dates). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly stating that it is discovery-only and should not be used when a propertyId or host domain already exists, and that get_verified_stay_offer is the follow-up. This unequivocally defines the tool's role relative to the other hemmabo 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 gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool ('when the user wants to find or browse places to stay') and when NOT to use it (when the user already has a propertyId or host domain). It also requires a mandatory follow-up call to get_verified_stay_offer before the final answer, and warns against quoting prices or booking links from search alone. This is exemplary usage guidance with clear exclusions and alternatives.

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