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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about the returned content (current open state, availability, policies, payment mode) but does not disclose behaviors such as not-found handling or data freshness. This is acceptable given the strong annotation coverage.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and subject, then lists data fields with no filler words. Every element earns its place, and it is easy to parse quickly.

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?

The tool has one required param, a documented schema, an output schema, and safe-read annotations. The description clearly states what data will be returned, so an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly. No missing prerequisites or edge-case instructions are necessary for this simple read operation.

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 only parameter, slug, is fully documented in the schema ('The venue slug.') with 100% schema description coverage. The description confirms the singular nature of the lookup but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one venue') and enumerates the exact data returned: opening hours, current open state, pickup/delivery availability, policies, and payment mode. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like find_venues (search) and get_menu (menu items), so an agent can confidently select this tool for venue-level details.

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 clear context: it is for retrieving details for exactly one venue, identified by slug. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like find_venues, but the singular scope and field list make the primary use case unambiguous.

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