search-hotels-by-coordinates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'search for hotels', which implies a read operation but does not disclose any side effects, permissions, rate limits, or return format. This is minimal and adds little beyond the tool name.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices informative value for brevity, so not a perfect score.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is very incomplete. It does not explain what the search results contain, how the coordinates are used, or any behavior around the optional filters. The schema covers parameters but not overall tool context.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for all 11 parameters, including formats and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so it does not enhance beyond the schema. Baseline 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 description states 'search for hotels by geographic coordinates', which clearly identifies the action (search), resource (hotels), and scope (by coordinates). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'search-flights' (hotels vs. flights) and 'today' (different domain). However, it lacks explicit mention of what 'search' returns (availability, prices, etc.), so it's not a full 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explain scenarios or exclusions. The description simply states what it does without any context for selection.

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