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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: prices are major-unit decimal strings in the menu currency and required modifier groups declare min/max selections.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences. The main action is stated immediately, followed by the most important downstream usage and data-format details. No filler or 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 single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the menu contains, how prices are represented, the modifier-group semantics, and how the returned ids connect to cart/order tools.

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%, with the slug parameter already documented as 'The venue slug.' The description does not add new meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a clear verb and resource: 'Get a venue’s full live menu.' It is obviously distinct from venue discovery and order/cart tools, though it does not explicitly name an alternative such as get_venue for venue metadata.

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 useful usage context: the returned item ids are intended for use in validate_cart and place_order. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but the downstream guidance implies the correct workflow.

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