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 warns 'Cannot be undone,' specifies that 'Cancellation confirmation is emailed to the address on file,' and provides procedural guidance about confirming with guests and checking refund policies. While annotations cover destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description adds practical implementation details that help the agent understand real-world consequences.

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 with clear sections (purpose, requirements, procedural guidance, outcomes) and every sentence adds value. While slightly longer than minimal, each part serves a distinct purpose in guiding the agent's behavior. The information is front-loaded with the core action and critical warnings.

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 destructive nature of the operation (destructiveHint=true), no output schema, and the complexity of hotel cancellations, the description provides excellent contextual completeness. It covers prerequisites, procedural steps, warnings about irreversible actions, refund implications, and confirmation mechanisms—everything an agent needs to use this tool responsibly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some context by emphasizing that these parameters are 'REQUIRED — must collect ALL before calling' and listing them explicitly, but doesn't provide additional semantic meaning beyond what's already in the schema descriptions for first_name, last_name, and confirmation_number.

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 ('Cancel a hotel reservation') and resource ('hotel reservation'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like book_hotel, get_booking, or search_hotels. It goes beyond the tool name to specify the exact domain and operation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: it states 'To change dates: search for new dates first, book the new reservation, THEN cancel the old one. Never cancel first — they could lose the room.' This clearly distinguishes from using search_hotels and book_hotel for modifications instead of canceling first.

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