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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds that results are US-only and discloses conditional return behavior — distance only appears for street addresses, Yelp rating only when on file — which is real context an agent can't get from 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return values, then the pre-call prerequisite. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema verbatim.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows what to expect. For a 4-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, the only minor omission is the limit parameter's behavior.

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 only 50% schema coverage, the description compensates for the undocumented parameters: it restates the accepted location formats and ties the fulfillment choice (delivery vs pickup) to the result set, and explains why a street address matters (distances). It says nothing about the undocumented 'limit' parameter (default 8, max 10), leaving that one gap.

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 ('Find restaurants') plus the scope that defines it: US locations, delivery or pickup. That scope cleanly separates it from siblings like get_menu and get_order_status, which are lookup tools for an already-chosen restaurant.

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?

Adds an actionable prerequisite: obtain a ZIP code, city/state, or street address from the user before calling. It doesn't name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., what to do when nothing is found, or that get_menu is the next step), so it stops short of 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.