search_food_menus

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so description adds value by specifying 'currently searches verified vendors matching categories or name'. However, it does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or result structure beyond the output schema.

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 sentences with no extraneous text. First sentence states purpose and scope, second adds a qualifying detail. Ideal length and structure.

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?

Given low complexity (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the essential functionality: city-scoped search of verified vendors. Could mention search behavior (e.g., fuzzy matching) but is generally complete with output schema present.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal meaning: city example 'Accra' (already defaulted) and query matching 'categories or name'. Does not explain allowed formats or provide examples for the parameters.

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 the tool searches for food dishes and restaurants in a specified city, using terms like 'search', 'dishes', 'restaurants', and 'catalogs'. It mentions 'verified vendors', which adds specificity but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'find_food_items'.

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 implies usage for searching food in a city, but lacks explicit when-to-use comparisons with alternatives like 'find_food_items' or 'get_verified_vendors_menu'. No guidance on when not to use.

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