Get guest reviews

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: ordering, inclusion of host replies, per-platform positive/negative points, recommendation flag, and the aggregate rating breakdown and star distribution. It does not mention pagination or handling of stays with no reviews, so it is not fully complete.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and ordering before enumerating returned fields. The long field list and the stray '(Otaghak)' parenthetical add minor noise, but every clause is informative and nothing is padded.

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 carries the full burden of describing return values, and it does so thoroughly (full text, rating, host reply, breakdown, star distribution). For a simple two-param read tool this is close to complete, though pagination and empty-result behavior remain unspecified.

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%, documenting both 'id' (format and example values) and 'limit' (range and default 50). The description adds nothing about parameter syntax or behavior, so the baseline 3 applies since the schema already carries this burden.

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 ('Guest reviews of one stay') and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling tools, which all deal with stays, locations or quotes rather than review content. Ordering ('newest first') and the fields returned are named, so an agent can tell exactly what it will get.

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 a concrete motivating use case ('Use it to judge cleanliness, noise, view or host behaviour from real guests'), which tells the agent when this tool is valuable. It stops short of naming exclusions or alternatives (e.g. that get_stay does not return reviews), so it is clear context but not full when/when-not guidance.

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