search_price_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states behavioral details: return must be after outbound, capped at 30 combinations, searched in parallel, sorted by price, trip_days calculated, and 1 API credit per combination (max 30). This is rich, non-obvious context.

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 sentences: purpose, behavior, and cost. Front-loaded with the main verb and resource. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description covers purpose, input combination logic, constraints, performance limit, cost, and output ordering. This is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how the date parameters interact (grid of outbound+return pairs, return must be after outbound, cap of 30 combos) and the output sorting, which goes beyond individual parameter descriptions.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Search a grid of outbound + return date combinations to find the cheapest week to fly.' It also gives a concrete example question ('What's the cheapest combination of July departure and August return for LHR-JFK?') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_flights or search_flights_flexible.

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 strong contextual cues for when to use this tool (comparing date ranges to find cheapest combination) via the example question. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives such as search_flights_flexible, leaving some ambiguity.

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