dunkin_directory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it explains that the tool returns one level of the tree, describes what each child contains (name, path, URL, store count), and introduces the is_store flag and how to proceed from a store child. This is rich behavioral context beyond the 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?

The description is tight and front-loaded, with the core behavior in the first sentence, then path navigation, then response content, then the alternative tool. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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 a browse tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description fully prepares the agent: how to start, how to recurse, what the response shape contains, how to identify leaves, and when to switch to dunkin_nearby or dunkin_store. No critical operational detail 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful navigation semantics on top: showing how the path hierarchy works with concrete examples ('ny', 'ny/new-york') and how to source paths from prior responses' children[].path. This goes beyond the schema's simple type declaration.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Browse the Dunkin store directory' and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining it is a directory browse, not a proximity search, pointing to dunkin_nearby. The tool's role in the family is 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?

Gives explicit usage instructions: omit path for root, pass a state path to list cities, pass a state/city path to list stores, and pass a store path to GET /dunkin/store. It also explicitly says to use GET /dunkin/nearby for radius lookups, naming the alternative and the condition that selects it.

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