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

With no annotations present, the description carries the load and does disclose real behavior: only published venues are returned, values are reproductions of printed prices, and each response carries a capture date and source link so staleness is visible. The 'prices change without notice' caveat is genuinely useful context an agent could not infer. Gaps remain around not-found handling and whether results are cached.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and payload, followed by a single-scope caveat. Nothing is repeated and every clause adds 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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description enumerates what a caller receives and flags data-freshness risk, which is sufficient to call it correctly. It could still say what happens when the slug is unknown or unpublished.

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% and the single parameter's meaning ('Venue slug from find_places_to_eat') lives in the schema itself. The description only restates 'by slug' and adds no format or sourcing detail beyond it; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get one published venue by slug') and enumerates the returned data: address, contact, hours, menu lines, capture date, source link. The 'published' qualifier signals scope, but it never names how it differs from siblings such as get_entity or get_experience, which also retrieve a single record.

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?

Usage is only implied: the description and schema together suggest this is the follow-up call once a slug is known from find_places_to_eat. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_entity or search_experiences, and no when-not guidance.

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