Get hotel details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful return-shape context (what fields come back) but says nothing about rate limits, error conditions, or behavior when hotelId is invalid/unknown. With annotations carrying the safety load, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

It is heavily padded with Markdown headers and bullet lists that restate the same idea four times ('What You Get' re-lists what the Overview already named; the four 'When to Use' bullets are near-duplicates). Front-loading is fine, but a large share of the text does not earn 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?

There is no output schema, and the description does a reasonable job enumerating the returned fields, which is the main thing an agent needs here. Still missing is any differentiation from the crowded hotel-sibling set, which is the key context gap for this tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents hotelId, timeout, language, and advancedAccessibilityOnly. The description only reaffirms that hotelId is required and passed as a query parameter; it adds no format, default, or interaction detail (e.g., what advancedAccessibilityOnly changes) beyond the schema, 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 overview states a specific verb+resource: fetch comprehensive details for a specific hotel (description, amenities, images, location, ratings). That is clear enough to act on. However, it never distinguishes itself from the many hotel siblings (get_data_hotels, get_data_hotel_search, get_data_hotel_ask, get_data_hotels_room_search), so an agent cannot tell which one to pick for detail retrieval.

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 'When to Use' list gives four bullets that all say the same thing – display hotel detail/booking/content pages – with no conditions that select this tool over its search/list siblings. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or named alternatives, so it provides no routing help.

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