search_attractions

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 transparency. It only mentions parameter defaults and that id is base64 encoded. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond the page parameter.

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 extremely concise: a single purpose line followed by a clear parameter list. No extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema (context signal) and relatively simple parameters, the description covers the essential input semantics. It lacks information about error handling or result structure, but the output schema handles return values. The prerequisite relationship with search_attraction_locations is noted.

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?

All three parameters (id, sortBy, page) are explicitly described with their roles, defaults, and constraints. The id is identified as a base64 encoded destination ID from a sibling tool, and sortBy and page have clear meanings and defaults. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 for attractions/tours in a specific location,' clearly identifying the action and resource. It mentions that the destination ID comes from sibling tool search_attraction_locations, providing context, but does not explicitly differentiate from related tools like get_attraction_details.

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 usage after obtaining a destination ID from search_attraction_locations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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