Local Business Facts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does add the important cost detail: one prepaid credit charged only when facts are found. However, it does not describe auth requirements, rate limits, failure behavior, or what happens when no facts are found, and the 'open signal' field is not explained.

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 two short clauses with zero waste. The core purpose and return fields are front-loaded, followed immediately by the cost condition.

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, but the description compensates by listing the returned fact fields, which gives the agent a clear expectation of the response. It is nearly complete for a simple two-parameter lookup, though it could say more about the optional country parameter and no-facts behavior.

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 50%: 'country' is documented in the schema, but 'url' is only a bare string. The description partially compensates by clarifying that the URL must be a business website URL, but it does not explain when to supply 'country' or how it affects results.

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 that it returns source-cited business facts for a website URL, and it enumerates the fact types (name, phone, address, hours, socials, open signal). It is specific about the resource and scope (any business website, worldwide), though it does not use an explicit verb like 'look up' and there are no siblings to distinguish it from.

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 implied by the phrase 'for any business website URL, worldwide', which tells the agent the intended input context. The cost note ('costs 1 prepaid credit when facts are found') adds a practical consideration, but the description does not state when not to use the tool or name alternatives.

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