post_dataforseo_business_tripadvisor_search_submitThis endpoint provides a list of business profiles listed on the Tripadvisor platform. The returned results are relevant to the specified keyword and the selected location (see the List of Locations).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / body / items / properties / postback_url / descriptionPrevious value: -"*return URL for sending task results* optional field once the task is completed, we will send a POST request with its results compressed in the `gzip` format to the `postback_url` you specified you can use the ‘$id’ string as a `$id` variable and ‘$tag’ as urlencoded `$tag` variable. We will set the necessary values before sending the request. example: `http://your-server.com/postbackscript?id=$id` `http://your-server.com/postbackscript?id=$id&tag=$tag` **Note:** special characters in `postback_url` will be urlencoded; i.a., the `#` character will be encoded into `%23`learn more on our [Help Center](https://dataforseo.com/help-center/pingbacks-postbacks-with-dataforseo-api)"New value: +"URL for sending task results optional field once the task is completed, we will send a POST request with its results compressed in the gzip format to the postback_url you specified you can use the ‘$id’ string as a $id variable and ‘$tag’ as urlencoded $tag variable. We will set the necessary values before sending the request. example: http://your-server.com/postbackscript?id=$id http://your-server.com/postbackscript?id=$id&tag=$tag Note: special characters in postback_url will be urlencoded; i.a., the # character will be encoded into %23 learn more on our [Help Center](https://dataforseo.com/help-center/pingbacks-postbacks-with-dataforseo-api)"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, i.e. a non-idempotent write that creates a task. The description instead says the endpoint 'provides a list of business profiles', implying a read. This framing contradicts the write/task-creation semantics declared by the annotations.
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 tight sentences with no filler; the content is front-loaded. It is well-sized, though what it conveys is misdirected rather than padded.
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 an asynchronous submit tool with a rich input schema (billing, pingback/postback, priority, depth) and an output schema, the description omits the essential task-submission behavior it should be clarifying. It leaves the agent without the context needed to use the tool correctly relative to its fetch sibling.
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 description adds no information about the body parameter or its fields; it only vaguely references 'keyword' and 'location'. With a single required parameter and no coverage contributed by the description, the agent gets no added clarity from the text.
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 frames this as a retrieval endpoint that 'provides a list of business profiles', but the tool name 'submit' and the sibling 'get_..._tripadvisor_search_fetch' indicate this actually submits an asynchronous search task. It identifies the data domain (Tripadvisor business profiles) but obscures the core action, making it hard to distinguish from the fetch 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?
There is no guidance on when to use this submit tool versus the corresponding fetch tool, nor any mention that it queues a task rather than returning results inline. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.