find_hotels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It adds useful context by stating that results are scored and ranked by how well they match criteria, and it enumerates the breadth of filter categories. It doesn't explicitly mention read-only behavior or output format, but 'search' implies a non-mutating operation and the ranking statement clarifies the result behavior.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose. The bullet-style category list is useful for navigating an 83-parameter schema, though it is somewhat long. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the content is not redundant with the schema.

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 high schema complexity and no output schema, the description provides a strong overview of capabilities and result ranking. It does not explicitly mention required parameters or default limits, but the schema covers those. The absence of a clear statement about return shape is a minor gap, but overall the description is adequate for an agent to select and use the tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description's category list loosely maps to the parameters (e.g., amenities, room features, policies) but does not add per-parameter details beyond what the schema already provides. It adds no value in clarifying individual parameter semantics.

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 searches for hotels with comprehensive filtering, which is a specific action on a specific resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'search_hotels', which likely performs a similar function, so it misses the opportunity to distinguish itself.

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 phrase 'comprehensive filtering options' implies usage when many filtering criteria are needed, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. 'search_hotels' or other siblings. No exclusions or alternative tool recommendations are provided.

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