search_hotels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions returns fields (names, brands, ratings, locations, rates) but does not disclose ordering, pagination, authentication requirements, or limitations (e.g., only Marriott hotels). The description is adequate but lacks depth for a tool with no annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with verb and resource. Every sentence adds value: first defines action and input, second defines output. No redundant or missing words.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and 15 sibling tools, the description is fairly complete for a search tool. It specifies output fields and input scope. However, it lacks details on default ordering, error conditions, and integration with other tools (e.g., after search, select_room).

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%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters. The description adds context by specifying that it returns hotel names, brands, ratings, etc., but does not add meaning to individual parameters beyond what the schema provides. The mention of 'Marriott hotels' adds slight value not in schema.

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 'Search' and the resource 'Marriott hotels', with specific scope by destination and dates, and lists return fields (hotel names, brands, ratings, locations, nightly rates). It distinguishes from siblings like get_hotel_details or get_room_options, which are more specific.

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 for initial search, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like select_room or get_reservation. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, which would help an agent choose correctly among 16 sibling tools.

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