Tripadvisor Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions nothing about whether it is read-only, whether it can be async (though parameters suggest async support), pagination behavior, rate limits, or whether it might be slow. The phrase 'documented endpoint' implies an external API but does not explain side effects or operational behavior.

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 is under-specified. It refers to 'documented' endpoint without offering any inline hint about the endpoint's purpose. For 8 parameters and complex sibling landscape, a few more sentences would improve usability without bloating.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 params, multiple siblings, output schema present), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the output looks like, how to interpret results, how to choose between sync/async, or how this search differs from tripadvisor_reviews. Agents would likely struggle to select and call this correctly without external documentation.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description, but the descriptions are minimal (e.g., 'Skip results', 'Maximum results'). The overall description does not explain how parameters like 'query' (array of strings) are used, what 'search_type' values are valid, or how 'execution_mode' differs from 'async'. It adds little beyond the schema.

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 'Search Tripadvisor' which is a clear verb+resource, but it lacks scoping details such as what types of entities (businesses, reviews, etc.) are returned. It only references the 'documented /tripadvisor-search endpoint' without elaborating, which is somewhat vague. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like 'tripadvisor_reviews' or 'businesses_search'.

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 siblings such as tripadvisor_reviews or google_maps_search. The description does not state whether to use it for general searches vs. specific entities, nor does it provide context like 'use for broad searches; use tripadvisor_reviews for detailed review retrieval'. With 8 parameters and many siblings, more guidance is needed.

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