ihg_modify_reservation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Modify an existing IHG reservation' without detailing side effects, whether changes are immediately applied, if pricing is recalculated, or if any prerequisites (e.g., authentication, modifiable reservation status) exist. The lack of such behavior context leaves the agent uncertain.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no wasteful words. It is appropriately sized and easy to parse 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?

For a modification tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., updated reservation), whether it is a partial or full update, or any prerequisites/limits. The provided schema covers parameter structure, but the description lacks behavioral and outcome context needed for a complete understanding.

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% with descriptive parameter fields, so the baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by listing the same categories (dates, guests, special requests, room type) but does not explain partial-update semantics (e.g., only provided fields change) or the meaning of the 'changes' object beyond what the schema already states.

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 verb 'Modify' and the resource 'existing IHG reservation', and enumerates the specific attributes that can be changed (dates, guests, special requests, room type). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ihg_cancel_reservation or ihg_book_room, which have different actions.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for altering an existing reservation. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use for date/guest changes, not for cancellations'), but the action and resource are unambiguous, making it evident when to use it.

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