Tripadvisor Search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, but it only references an undocumented endpoint. It fails to mention sync/async behavior, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects, offering no meaningful transparency for an action that may involve network requests and data retrieval.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it includes the redundant phrase 'with the documented /tripadvisor-search endpoint' that adds no practical value. It is not bloated, but the lack of substance makes the structure underinformative rather than optimally concise.

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?

Despite having an output schema and abundant parameter documentation, the tool is complex (8 parameters, multiple async-related options) and sits among many sibling tools. The description provides zero contextual guidance on when to use it, how it behaves, or how to configure it, leaving the agent to rely solely on external documentation and schema.

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 parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides, but since the schema thoroughly documents all parameters (e.g., query, limit, execution_mode), a baseline score is appropriate.

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 action 'Search' and the resource 'Tripadvisor', which makes the tool's primary purpose evident. It distinguishes itself from other platform-specific searches (e.g., google_search, yelp_reviews) by naming Tripadvisor, though it does not differentiate among the multiple Tripadvisor tools (e.g., tripadvisor_reviews).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., tripadvisor_reviews, tp_data, businesses_search). It does not mention any context, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to guess based on the tool name alone.

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