Get stay details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description goes further by disclosing the breadth of the response payload, including surprising items like missing amenities and host response time, which helps an agent gauge cost and result size. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but for a read tool this is a strong addition.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that immediately states the core purpose before the enumeration. The long field list is dense but defensible because no output schema exists to carry that information.

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 describe what comes back, and it does so thoroughly across description, amenities, rules, pricing, ratings, photos and extras. Output-schema absence makes this the right place for that detail, though it never states the return format (object vs. text) or error behavior for an invalid id.

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% and there is a single parameter whose format ('<platform>:<id>') is fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about the id, so the baseline of 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 ('Full details of one stay') and enumerates the exact content returned, so an agent knows it is the single-record detail fetch. It does not name a sibling to contrast with (e.g. search_stays, get_quote), so differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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?

The implicit usage is clear — fetch details for a known stay id — but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and the closer alternatives (search_stays for listings, get_quote for pricing) are not mentioned. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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