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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by describing the payload shape and by surfacing a data-semantics nuance ("demo: true marks a sample listing that is not a real place") that an agent would otherwise misread as a live business. It does not cover visibility/auth rules for unpublished listings.

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 sentences, no filler, and the payload contents are front-loaded before the demo caveat. Every clause carries information an agent can use.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating the returned fields, and it flags the demo-listing edge case. Minor gaps remain: nothing about behavior when the id is unknown/invalid, whether non-public businesses are returned, or any auth requirement.

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 "business" parameter is documented as "business_id or slug" in the schema. The description adds no format, resolution, or ambiguity guidance beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Full card of one business") and enumerates exactly what the card contains: offerings with prices, extras, booking rules, intake questions, hours, cancellation policy, contacts. This clearly differentiates it from the plural-list sibling search_businesses and from owner_update_business.

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 singular "one business" and the business_id/slug parameter make it obvious this is the detail lookup, but the description never says when to prefer it over search_businesses or get_booking, and states no prerequisites or exclusions.

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