check_availability

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Real-time pricing and dates' implies read-only behavior and possibly time-sensitive data, but it doesn't disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'real-time' means operationally. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic implication.

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 very concise with just three words, which is efficient. However, it's arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise, as it lacks necessary detail for a tool with one required parameter and no annotations. Still, it's front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 1 required parameter, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'real-time' entails, what the output looks like, or how to interpret results. For a tool that likely returns structured data (pricing/dates), this is inadequate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'pricing and dates' but doesn't explain the 'property_id' parameter at all—not what it represents, format expectations, or how it relates to the output. The description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond the tool name's implication.

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 'Real-time pricing and dates' indicates the tool provides current pricing and date information, which gives a general purpose. However, it's vague about what resource this applies to (properties, bookings, etc.) and doesn't specify the verb (check, retrieve, fetch). It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'search_properties' or 'create_booking'.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or when not to use it. With siblings like 'search_properties' and 'create_booking', there's no indication of how this tool differs in usage scenarios.

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