Answer Japan Seasonal Travel Question

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

The tool has annotations readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, which already cover safety. The description adds minimal behavioral context ('routes to the right live dataset and returns a ready-to-use recommendation'), which is helpful but not substantial beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage, and every sentence adds value. No extraneous information.

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 5 optional parameters, an output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is complete. It tells what the tool does, when to use it, and when not to, which is sufficient for an agent to correctly select and invoke it.

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 five parameters. The tool description does not add extra parameter-level detail beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the tool is for broad Japan seasonal travel questions, listing specific topics like cherry blossoms, autumn leaves, and festivals. It clearly differentiates from siblings by noting it is the best entry point for natural traveler prompts and contrasts with non-seasonal tools.

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 provides explicit when-to-use ('when the user asks a broad Japan seasonal travel question') and when-not-to-use ('Do not use for hotels, flights, trains, visas, restaurants, or generic itinerary planning unrelated to seasonal timing'). This is exemplary guidance.

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