Search accommodations

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that prices are in Toman and that booking happens on shab.ir via listing_url, but it omits pagination behavior, result composition, default sorting, and how the many filters affect results.

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 three short sentences, front-loads the purpose, and avoids filler. It is concise, though that conciseness comes at the cost of necessary detail for a 23-parameter tool.

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 complex search tool with 23 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is far too sparse. It provides the currency and a booking pointer but omits essential context about filtering, pagination, defaults, and what the results contain.

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?

With 23 parameters and only 35% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate: it clarifies only that prices are in Toman, leaving sort_by, page, per_page, is_instant, coordinate filters, accommodation_type, and others unexplained. The mention of listing_url is not an input parameter and does not help with invocation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: searching Shab stays, which the name clarifies as accommodations. It does not differentiate this tool from siblings such as sh_search_destinations or sh_count_accommodations, but the core purpose is clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this search tool versus alternatives like sh_get_similar_accommodations or sh_count_accommodations. The booking note about listing_url is a post-search action, not a condition for selecting this tool.

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