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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, which convey safety and idempotency. However, the description adds no behavioral detail beyond those annotations, such as whether it returns a single venue by ID or what happens if no venue is found.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. A single vague phrase does not earn its place because it provides almost no useful information to the agent.

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?

Despite having annotations and an output schema, the description completely fails to explain the tool's core function. The agent cannot reliably determine what 'single venue' means operationally or how it relates to sibling tools, making the description inadequate for correct tool selection and 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?

The input schema lists 'id' and 'locale' with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the meaning or purpose of these parameters, leaving the agent to infer that 'id' identifies a venue and 'locale' might affect localization, but with no explicit guidance.

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 'Single venue.' is a noun phrase that merely restates the tool name (Venue) without stating an action. It does not specify whether this tool retrieves, creates, or deletes a venue, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like venue_search.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like venue_search, attraction, or event. The description provides no context for choosing this tool in a workflow.

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