Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• airbnb_listing_detailsC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves information (implying read-only) and mentions providing direct links, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what 'detailed information' includes. The 'ignoreRobotsText' parameter hints at web scraping behavior, but the description doesn't explain this or other operational traits, leaving significant gaps.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is brief and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds output behavior but could be more integrated. It avoids redundancy and wastes no words, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., clarifying the link provision). Overall, it's efficient but not perfectly polished.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no annotations, no output schema, and 8 parameters, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values (beyond 'direct links'), error cases, authentication needs, or how parameters interact. For a tool with potential complexity (e.g., date-based queries, robots.txt handling), more context is needed to guide effective use by an agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying the 'id' is required for a 'specific' listing. It doesn't explain relationships between parameters (e.g., how dates affect pricing) or provide context beyond what the schema already states, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get detailed information about a specific Airbnb listing.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('Airbnb listing'), and distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'airbnb_search' by focusing on details for a specific listing rather than searching. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling beyond the 'specific' qualifier.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides minimal guidance: it implies use when detailed info for a specific listing is needed, but offers no explicit when-to-use rules, alternatives, or exclusions. It mentions 'Provide direct links to the user,' which hints at output behavior but doesn't clarify usage context. No comparison to 'airbnb_search' is made, leaving the agent to infer when to choose one over the other.

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

• airbnb_searchC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination and providing direct links, which adds some context beyond the input schema. However, it lacks critical behavioral details such as rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or what the output looks like (beyond 'direct links'). For a search tool with 12 parameters and no annotations, this is insufficient.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds useful output context. Both sentences earn their place, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., explicitly noting key filter types).

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity (12 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format beyond 'direct links,' lacks error handling or rate limit info, and provides minimal guidance on usage. For a search tool with many filters and pagination, more context is needed to help an agent use it effectively.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 100% description coverage, so all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'various filters and pagination,' which aligns with parameters like minPrice/maxPrice and cursor, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Search for Airbnb listings with various filters and pagination.' It specifies the verb ('search') and resource ('Airbnb listings'), and mentions key capabilities (filters, pagination). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'airbnb_listing_details' beyond the general search vs. details distinction.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides minimal usage guidance. It mentions 'Provide direct links to the user' which hints at output format, but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. There's no mention of the sibling tool 'airbnb_listing_details' or when to choose one over the other.

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