get_rooms

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 disclosure. It describes the tool as a read operation ('View') and details the return data, which is helpful. However, it lacks information on potential side effects (e.g., if it caches data), error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and efficiently lists the return data. Every part adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description provides a clear purpose and return data, which is adequate for a read-only tool. However, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like error conditions or data freshness, and without an output schema, the return format is only partially described (e.g., no mention of structure or pagination), leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 schema already fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining relationships between parameters (e.g., how 'adults' and 'rooms' affect results) or usage tips. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles all parameter documentation.

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 specific action ('View available room types and rates'), the target resource ('for a specific hotel and date range'), and the return data ('room names, bed types, prices, points rates, and cancellation policies'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'search_hotels' (which finds hotels) and 'select_room' (which presumably books a room).

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 context by specifying 'for a specific hotel and date range,' suggesting it should be used after identifying a hotel. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_hotel_details' (which might provide general hotel info) or 'select_room' (which likely involves booking), nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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