find_guest

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals that the endpoint is bounded by created_since_utc, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not describe other behaviors such as pagination, authentication, or whether search is case-insensitive, leaving some opacity.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 optional-parameter search/list tool, the description is mostly complete: it states the purpose and the key bound. An output schema exists so return values are documented. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from potentially overlapping siblings like who_is_staying, and it doesn't clarify the search-vs-list behavior (e.g., 'with no query, lists all'). Still, given the low complexity, it's adequate.

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?

The schema already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (coverage 100%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning by explaining that the endpoint is bounded by created_since_utc, giving context for that parameter, but it does not elaborate on query or max_items.

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 states 'Search or list guests,' which clearly identifies the operation (search/list) and the resource (guests). This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_owners and list_bookings, which operate on different entities. The mention of the OwnerRez bound adds specificity without confusing the purpose.

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 the tool is for finding guests but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like who_is_staying or list_bookings. It provides no exclusionary guidance or named alternatives, though the resource type itself helps. The bound on created_since_utc offers some context about result scope.

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