compare_rates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by describing the return format (comparison table with cash rate, points rate, CPP valuation, value signals) and the constraint of max 5 hotel_ids. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it could mention rate limits or data freshness.

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: purpose, usage context, return value, then args list. It is not overly long, but the args list somewhat repeats information already in the schema. Could be slightly more concise, but overall efficient.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown but stated), the description doesn't need to detail return values beyond mentioning the comparison table and highlights. All four parameters are explained, and the context of using after search_hotels is clear. The description is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose, including the constraint that hotel_ids come from search_hotels and max 5, the date format YYYY-MM-DD, and the default for num_adults. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 it compares cash vs points rates across multiple hotels side-by-side. It specifically distinguishes from sibling tools like search_hotels (which searches for hotels) and get_hotel_details (which gets details for a single hotel), making the purpose precise and unique.

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 says 'Use this after search_hotels to help a user decide between their top hotel picks,' providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools like get_multi_night_rates for single hotel rates, which would have earned a 5.

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