Create virtual tour

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, openWorld=true, destructive=false) by disclosing that a tourId returns immediately, that the build takes ~10s/room, that the caller must poll pedra_get_virtual_tour until status is 'ready', and the exact credit formula per linking mode.

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?

Information-dense and front-loaded with the outcome, then inputs, then linking costs, then async behavior. Slightly long for a single paragraph, but nearly every clause carries unique operational value.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the immediate return value (tourId), the polling requirement, and the terminal status — everything an agent needs to invoke and follow up correctly.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic value: what 'sequential'/'smart'/'none' actually do, their relative cost, and the walking-order meaning of the scenes array.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Build a hosted 360° virtual tour') plus the concrete outputs (shareable link and embed code), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like pedra_add_virtual_tour_scenes or pedra_update_virtual_tour.

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?

Explicitly covers the two mutually exclusive input paths (pass scenes in walking order, or just propertyId to use all 360° photos), names the alternative linking modes with their tradeoffs, and states the 'one tour per property' constraint.

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