get_hotels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states it returns hotel information but does not disclose any limitations, error handling, authentication needs, or boundary behaviors like filtering by radius. It is not misleading, but it lacks depth beyond the obvious read-only search nature.

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?

Two sentences that are direct and front-loaded with the core action and key input. No filler or redundancy, earning full credit.

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?

The description covers the purpose and gives a partial output summary (names, ratings, locations). With 8 parameters, it does not explain how filters interact, but the schema covers them fully. Since there is no output schema, the description's brief return-value note is helpful, though a bit thin for a tool with many optional filters.

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond restating the cityCode usage (already in the schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate because the 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 tool's function ('Search for hotels in a city using the city's IATA code') and specifies the output ('names, ratings, and locations'). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_flights and get_tours_activities by focusing on hotels, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 hotel searches in a city, which gives clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention conditions like 'use this for hotels, not flights,' so it stops short of a 5.

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