calculate_travel_budget

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It claims inputs include 'comfort level' and categories, which are not in the input schema (only destination, days, travelers). This discrepancy is misleading. It also does not mention any side effects, authentication, or limitations, and the return format is vague ('total and per-day breakdown').

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it includes inaccurate information (extra parameters), which undermines its conciseness. A correct, concise version would be higher.

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 simple input schema (3 parameters with descriptions) and existence of an output schema (not shown), the description provides basic return info ('total and per-day breakdown') but fails to accurately describe inputs. The mention of categories and comfort level without schema support makes it incomplete.

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% for the three parameters, but the description introduces 'comfort level' and categories not in the schema, causing confusion. It does not add meaningful explanation beyond what the schema provides and misleads about actual parameters.

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 'Estimate total trip budget by category' with specific categories (transport, accommodation, food, activities) and mentions the use context 'trip planning'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_bundles' for related calculators.

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 description says 'Use for trip planning' and directs to 'list_bundles' for related 'voyage' calculators, providing a clear alternative. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context of sibling tools (all calculate_*) makes the intended use clear.

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