Get hotel details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does signal a read-only 'static content' retrieval and lists the returned fields, which gives some transparency. However, it omits whether codes must first come from search_hotels, whether unknown codes error or return empty, and any rate or language limitations.

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?

One tight sentence, front-loaded with scope ('one or more hotels') followed by the payload list. No filler or restated name; slightly dense but earns its words.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by enumerating the returned static fields (description, images, facilities, address, coordinates, phones, boards), which is what an agent needs. Only the absence of any usage routing or failure behavior keeps it short of complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the key semantic that hotelCodes accepts 'one or more' hotels, matching the integer-or-array schema, but adds nothing about language or maxImages beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('full static content for one or more hotels') and enumerates the content returned, so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling list_hotels_content, whose name suggests overlapping content, leaving some ambiguity about which to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite, and no mention of alternatives despite two other sibling tools (search_hotels, list_hotels_content) that plausibly overlap. The agent must infer that this is the detail-fetch step after a search, which is reasonable but unstated.

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