Get accommodation photos

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the fact that results are URLs rather than binary images; it says nothing about ordering, maximum counts, or what happens when a listing has no photos.

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?

A single seven-word sentence with zero filler and the returned resource front-loaded. There is no wasted wording; the brevity problem is under-specification, which is penalized in other dimensions.

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 simple single-parameter read tool with full annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential return type (photo URLs) but leaves the identifier's origin and the empty-result behavior unspecified. It is minimally adequate rather than complete.

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?

The schema has one required parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description carries full responsibility for explaining accommodation_id, yet it never names the parameter or states that it must come from a search result. "For a stay" is the only indirect hint and does not compensate for the missing coverage.

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?

"List photo URLs for a stay" gives a specific verb (list) and resource (photo URLs), which distinguishes it from siblings like sh_get_accommodation_reviews or sh_get_accommodation. It is clear what the tool returns, though "a stay" is slightly indirect phrasing for what the single parameter actually is.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no mention of how it differs from sh_get_accommodation (which plausibly also surfaces photos), and no note on prerequisites such as needing a valid id from sh_search_accommodations. An agent must infer everything from the name alone.

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