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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool searches all restaurants, groups results by dish, and what fields are returned. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only search tool this is adequate.

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 three sentences: first states purpose, second details behavior with an example, third gives usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with the main action.

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 simple search tool with only 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the description completely covers what the tool does, how to use it, and what the response looks like.

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% with descriptions for 'limit' and 'query'. The description adds context about grouping by dish and the return format, which supplements the schema nicely.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find which restaurants serve a dish in this neighborhood.' It provides a concrete example with a query and what information is returned, and it implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_restaurant_menus' by specifying it searches across all restaurants.

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 explicitly says 'Use this for any 'where can I eat X' question' and explains behavior when omitting the query. While it does not list when not to use it, the context is clear and sufficient for most use cases.

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