List destinations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose the key behavioral trait: this is a code-lookup that feeds search_hotels rather than a search itself. It implies a safe read but never states that the operation is non-mutating or mentions rate limits or result-count behavior beyond the schema's limit field.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed by how to use the output. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a simple three-parameter list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the definition says what comes back (destination codes) and how to consume it. It stops just short of describing pagination/limit interaction or the shape of each returned item, which keeps it from a 5.

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 countryCode, nameContains, and limit are all documented in the schema itself. The description only restates country scoping and the optional name filter, adding no format or semantics beyond the structured fields; baseline 3 applies.

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 (list destination codes) plus the scoping constraint (for a country, optional name filter). The 'Hotelbeds destination codes' phrasing and the downstream tie to search_hotels make it immediately distinguishable from lookup siblings like get_hotel_details or list_hotels_content.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use the result: 'Use the code as destinationCode in search_hotels,' which routes it correctly in the booking flow. It does not name a competing alternative or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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