get_experience_details

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

Annotations indicate read-only, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, which the description does not contradict. It adds context by specifying input preferences and the scope of data fetched (availability, venue details, images), enhancing understanding beyond the annotations.

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 is front-loaded with the core purpose and usage guidelines in two concise sentences, with no wasted words. Every sentence contributes directly to tool understanding and selection.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and input semantics well, but could benefit from mentioning potential outputs or limitations, though annotations help mitigate this gap.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds value by clarifying input preferences (slug as preferred, provider/provider_id as legacy fallbacks) but does not provide additional semantic details beyond what the schema already covers.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Get detailed availability, venue details, and images') and the resource ('a specific tickadoo® experience'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like find_nearby_experiences, list_cities, and search_experiences by focusing on details for a single experience rather than searching or listing.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool by specifying preferred inputs ('tickadoo slug or booking URL path') and fallback options ('provider and provider_id are legacy fallback inputs'), helping the agent choose this over alternatives for retrieving detailed information on a known experience.

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