deliveroo_restaurant_menu

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the output structure (grouped categories, item fields including conditional product-meta, price, availability, customization options) and gives concrete examples. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'Get' implies it. The level of detail is strong for a read operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then elaborating on content. It is information-dense without being verbose, and the structure flows logically from scope to details. No wasted words.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description must explain return values, and it does so thoroughly: grouping by categories, item attributes, conditional product-meta with examples, and customization options with bounds. It covers all essential aspects an agent needs to anticipate the response. Missing pagination or error info is minor given the 'full catalog' claim.

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% for both parameters (uname and market) with clear explanations. The description adds no new parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, so it stays at the baseline of 3.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one Deliveroo restaurant, grocery, or shopping partner's priced catalog'). It differentiates from siblings by specifying it returns a full menu/catalog grouped into categories, covering all partner types, and references the search endpoint's collection parameter. This makes its unique role unambiguous.

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 the tool is used after obtaining a partner slug via /deliveroo/search, noting the collection parameter for context. It does not explicitly state 'use when you have a uname' or contrast with alternative menu tools, but the input schema clarifies the dependency. The guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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