verify_vacation_rental_node

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

The description goes beyond annotations by detailing the exact files read (.well-known/vacation-rental.json and JWKS) and explicitly stating the read-only nature, no availability/pricing/booking/payment. This aligns with readOnlyHint and adds specific behavioral context without contradiction.

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 consists of two concise sentences: first defines purpose, second adds details and next-step guidance. No redundant words, efficiently front-loaded.

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 the tool has one parameter, full schema coverage, and complete annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, mechanism, and next steps. Lacks explicit error handling details (e.g., failure return), but overall sufficient for an agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a detailed parameter description. The tool description adds no new parameter information beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: to verify a host domain as a valid Vacation Rental Protocol (VRP) node. It specifies the action ('verify'), the resource ('domain'), and provides context about what it does and does not do, distinguishing it from sibling tools like booking or search.

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 usage context: use before trusting a host domain, and after success, call get_verified_stay_offer. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the context suffices for an agent to understand the tool's role in the workflow.

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