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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully notes that hours are returned for fixed locations only and that mobile businesses have no fixed address, which is real behavioral context. However, it says nothing about errors for invalid subdomains, rate limits, or whether this is a read-only public endpoint — gaps that a mutation-free lookup tool of this simplicity can tolerate at a 3.

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?

One dense but front-loaded paragraph that leads with the operation and then lists outputs; every clause earns its place, including the mobile-business caveat. It is slightly list-heavy but not padded.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly compensates by enumerating the returned fields (including conditional ones like hours and order page URL) and covers the mobile-business edge case. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 the single parameter already documents the subdomain with a concrete example ("nitos" for nitos.shortlistpass.com). The description adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 (get) and resource (public profile of one business), then enumerates exactly what is returned: name, type, description, town, phone, website, page URL, hours, ordering status, order page URL. It also explicitly contrasts with the sibling get_upcoming_events for mobile businesses, so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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?

Gives a clear usage context (fetch one business's public profile by subdomain) and a routing rule for mobile/food-truck businesses pointing to get_upcoming_events. It does not state when to prefer search_businesses or what happens on an unknown subdomain, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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