get_hotel_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get property details' which implies a read operation, but does not mention any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the response contains. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action and input without any filler. It is appropriately concise and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the input type but omits details about the response structure, potential errors, or any behavioral constraints. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, this is a moderate gap – the agent knows what to call but not what to expect back.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It adds clarity by specifying that the parameter is a 'Marriott property code or URL', which goes beyond the schema's generic pattern and URI format. This gives the agent a clear understanding of what to pass.

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 action (get) and resource (property details), and specifies the input type (Marriott property code or URL). It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like search_hotels, but the purpose is unambiguous and self-contained.

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 implies usage for retrieving details of a specific known property, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives like search_hotels or get_room_options. There is no mention of when not to use it or what scenarios favor this tool, so guidance is only implied.

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