1Stay Hotel Booking

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: rate_code expiration time, payment structure (guests pay hotel directly, 1Stay fee added at checkout), loyalty points eligibility, and room type clarifications. No contradiction with annotations.

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 appropriately sized, with key information front-loaded (purpose and critical usage note). Some sentences could be more concise (e.g., the room type notes are detailed but necessary). Overall, it's efficient with minimal waste.

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 annotations cover safety (read-only, non-destructive) and the schema fully documents parameters, the description provides excellent contextual completeness. It adds critical behavioral details (expiration, payment structure, room type nuances) that are essential for proper tool usage, compensating for the lack of output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add specific parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but it implies the parameters are used to fetch hotel details for specific dates and occupancy. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Get') and resources ('room types, live rates, amenities, cancellation policies, and rate_codes for a specific hotel'), making the purpose explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_hotels' by focusing on detailed information for a specific hotel rather than searching for hotels.

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 'Required before booking' and mentions rate_code expiration (~15 minutes), providing clear when-to-use guidance. It distinguishes from booking tools by indicating this is a prerequisite step, and from search tools by focusing on a specific hotel ID.

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