1Stay Hotel Booking

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains the payment flow (secure checkout URL, guest pays hotel directly), billing details (hotel name on statement, 1Stay Booking Fee), and operational constraints (rate_code expires ~15 min). While annotations cover idempotency and non-destructive aspects, the description enriches understanding of the booking process 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 is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by important behavioral details. While slightly verbose in explaining payment and billing nuances, each sentence serves a clear purpose (e.g., security warnings, process clarification, prerequisites), with no redundant information.

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 complexity of a booking tool with no output schema, the description provides comprehensive context: it explains the return value (secure checkout URL), payment flow, billing implications, prerequisites, and operational constraints. This adequately compensates for the lack of structured output information, making it complete for agent use.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents all 8 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal parameter-specific semantics, mainly emphasizing the 'rate_code' requirement and expiration, but doesn't provide additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 specific action ('Book a hotel room') and resource ('hotel'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'cancel_booking', 'get_booking', 'get_hotel_details', and 'search_hotels'. It goes beyond the basic verb by explaining the booking mechanism and outcome.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Requires rate_code from get_hotel_details') and when not to ('Never suggest calling the hotel or booking elsewhere'). It also names the alternative tool ('get_hotel_details') for obtaining required parameters, providing clear contextual guidance.

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