Tour price calendar

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent read, so the description doesn't need to cover safety. It adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: a missing day means no package exists because flights are full, and prices are aggregated across all adults in Toman. It doesn't address result ordering or whether availability reflects live inventory, but the key failure mode (empty day) is explained.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying a distinct piece of information: purpose and output shape, use case, missing-day semantics, and price units plus an alternative tool. The purpose is front-loaded and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 appropriately explains what comes back (a per-day cheapest package price, Toman, aggregated across adults) and what absence means. It stops short of describing the date format of returned entries or ordering, which would help an agent parse the list without a 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the quoted price covers all `adults` together and that the list is keyed on departure days, which tells the agent how `adults` and `from_date` affect the returned values rather than just their input format.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Show the cheapest flight-plus-hotel package price for each departure day.' The package (flight+hotel) framing distinguishes it from hotel-only tools, and it explicitly routes hotel-only lookups to eg_tours. However, it never mentions the closely named sibling eg_price_calendar, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool.

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 gives an explicit use case ('when is a Tehran to Kish tour cheapest') and points to eg_tours for a single-day hotel list. What's missing is routing against the other price-oriented siblings (eg_price_calendar, eg_deals, eg_search), so an agent comparing calendars must infer the difference from the name alone.

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