Search reservations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully discloses the permission requirement (WebHotelier account with reservations access) and the behavior when access is missing (returns a clear permission message). It also adds the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and confirms that filters are optional. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, though 'search' implies it.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence states the core purpose and filters; the second adds a necessary permission note. 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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, optional filters, date format, and a crucial permission prerequisite. Given that all parameters are optional and well-described in the schema, this is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool. The lack of an output schema is not compensated for, but the description implies the tool returns matching bookings, which is adequate for a simple search. Could be slightly improved by mentioning that no filters returns all reservations, but this is not a major gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema: the schema already documents each parameter with descriptions (e.g., 'Earliest check-in date', 'WebHotelier property code'). The description merely notes the date format, which the schema's pattern also defines. Therefore, the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema already provides.

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's function with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('bookings'), and specifies optional filters (property, check-in date range). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_rates and get_availability, which target other data types.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The only context provided is the permission requirement, which is more of a prerequisite than a usage guideline. There is no mention of sibling tools or recommended scenarios.

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