Cheapest tour per day

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), but the description adds substantive behavior: prices are Toman per person, they are per-tour for `nights` nights, and days with no tours are omitted rather than zero-priced. That sparse-result disclosure is exactly the kind of trait an agent needs before interpreting the response.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information (scope, sequencing, price semantics), with the core behavior front-loaded. The only blemish is awkward mid-sentence line breaks that slightly hurt scannability.

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 must convey the return shape, and it does: a per-day lowest price keyed to the 11-day window, in Toman per person, with missing days absent. It stops short of specifying ordering or whether a full day-by-day object is returned, which is a minor remaining gap for a tool with no output 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 all four parameters are already documented in the schema, including the Gregorian/Jalali date rule and the `nights` counting convention. The description restates the nights basis and adds the per-person price framing but adds no new parameter syntax or constraints, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource (list the lowest tour price per person) plus the exact scope: 11 departure days, 5 before and 5 after a given date. It also names the sibling al_tours as the contrasting tool, so an agent can distinguish it without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit selection rule — 'Use before al_tours when the date is flexible' — and a follow-up rule — 'Then call al_tours for the chosen day.' Both the when-to-use condition and the alternative tool are named directly.

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