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

Beyond the readOnly and non-destructive annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavior: scored food and drink venues are returned first, unscored categories follow, results are ordered by recency within each group, and pre-2026-06-06 dates are estimates reconstructed from history. This gives the agent accurate expectations for ordering and data provenance.

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 compact and well-structured: purpose first, then use cases, then ordering behavior, then the date-estimate caveat. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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 read-only list tool with three optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers what the tool returns, how results are ordered, when to use it, and an important data-quality caveat. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents city, days, and limit. The description adds context that there are 20 cities and that city may target one city, but this does not substantially go beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: listing venues recently added to the Dim Hour catalog, optionally filtered by city. It clearly distinguishes this from curation or search by emphasizing recency, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings like list_curated and search_venues.

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 gives explicit use cases: what's new on Dim Hour, new-opening alerts, and weekly digests. It does not explicitly state when to prefer alternatives such as search or list_curated, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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