Compare ski passes

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context about what the comparison covers (price, coverage, value) and how optional parameters affect it, going beyond 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 with no waste. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently explains optional parameter usage. Every sentence earns its place.

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 output schema exists (documenting return values) and the tool has 4 optional parameters, the description adequately covers the core functionality and optional enhancements. No gaps remain.

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 descriptions cover all 4 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds semantic value by explaining how each optional parameter is used (e.g., resortSlugs for coverage scoring, tripDays for value calculation), which enhances understanding beyond the 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 tool compares ski passes on price, resort coverage, and value. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_pass (single pass) or compare_resorts (resort comparison).

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 gives clear context on optional parameters (resortSlugs, tripDays) for detailed comparison. It does not explicitly exclude use cases or mention alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough for selection.

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