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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful non-obvious trait: the call is credential-free, which tells the agent no auth setup is required. It doesn't cover rate limits or caching, but for a read-only lookup the added context is solid.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the return payload, then the auth trait, then the sibling routing. No filler; every clause carries information.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be detailed, and the description still summarizes them. For a one-required-param read tool with annotations covering side effects, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, so the single parameter is already documented. The description's 'restaurant_id: OpenTable restaurant id' merely restates the schema field and adds no format, sourcing, or lookup guidance beyond it, matching the baseline for schema-complete params.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (returns a restaurant's menus) and enumerates the payload granularity (sections, items, prices), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It is clearly distinct from the profile/availability sibling.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to opentable_restaurant for a restaurant profile and live availability, establishing the complement to this tool. It stops short of an explicit 'do not use this for availability' phrasing, but the division of labor is unambiguous.

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