Tour packages

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses return composition (hotel, stars, rating, room, meal plan, transport, per-person and group price), latency/polling behavior ('at most 15 polls per call'), and that purchase must happen on alibaba.ir. This adds substantial operational context not covered by readOnly/openWorld/idempotent hints.

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 front-loads the purpose and then packs useful example, result, latency, and purchase-path information into a compact block. A few phrases are dense, but there is no obvious filler.

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?

For a 9-parameter, open-world search tool with no output schema, it explains what comes back, how quickly, and that the tool does not complete a purchase. The main completeness gap is the lack of explicit comparison to al_tours_cheapest, which matters given the sibling list.

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 all nine parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces that prices are per person and for the whole group and describes the package result, but adds little parameter-specific meaning 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 gives a clear verb and resource — searching tour packages that bundle round trip and hotel — and scopes it to city-to-destination searches with example destinations. It does not differentiate from the close sibling al_tours_cheapest, and the phrase 'cheapest package' per hotel may blur that boundary.

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?

It provides a concrete usage example ('a 3-night Kish tour for two from Tehran next week'), which gives clear context for selecting the tool. It offers no explicit when-not guidance or comparison to alternatives such as al_tours_cheapest.

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