ihg_redeem_points

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose side effects. It states the tool 'initiates a points booking,' which implies a mutation, but does not clarify whether this completes a reservation, requires confirmation, or has cancellations/refund policies. Lacking any behavioral context beyond the action itself is insufficient for a booking-related tool.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core action ('Check points redemption options') and includes the secondary action ('initiate a points booking'). No filler or redundant information, making it exceptionally concise.

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?

The tool involves both a read operation (checking options) and a write operation (initiating a booking), yet there is no output schema, no annotations, and no elaboration on what 'initiate' entails (e.g., booking confirmation, payment, or modification of existing reservations). The description is too thin for a tool with side effects.

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% for all three parameters (hotel_id, check_in, check_out), and each has a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function with specific verbs: 'Check points redemption options' and 'initiate a points booking.' It identifies the resource (points for a hotel stay) and likely distinguishes from siblings like ihg_get_room_rates (cash rates) and ihg_book_room (general booking) by emphasizing points. However, the dual action could be slightly ambiguous, so it doesn't fully reach a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or explicitly reference sibling tools like ihg_book_room or ihg_get_room_rates. The points-specific phrasing implies usage for points bookings, but without explicit direction, it falls short.

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