fiveguys_ordering_menu

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does a solid job: it discloses the data source, the pricing nature, exact returned fields, calorie ranges, image/availability, and the special id semantics. It does not mention rate limits, auth, or invalid-id behavior, but for a read-only menu retrieval these are less critical.

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 overall purpose is front-loaded and every section contributes information an agent needs. Some sentences are long and slightly redundant (one store's priced menu / one restaurant's full priced menu), but none are filler.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it tells the agent where the id comes from, what the tool returns, how price/calories/availability behave, and which family members this tool relates to. Minor gaps such as currency or error behavior are not material enough to lower it further.

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 nuance by explaining that id is the ordering platform's restaurant id, is not a Yext entity id, and does not correspond to ids from /fiveguys/search, /fiveguys/nearby, /fiveguys/directory, or /fiveguys/store—guarding against a likely agent error.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get one Five Guys store's priced menu from the ordering platform. It also explicitly differentiates this from GET /fiveguys/menu, which is the marketing content with no prices, so an agent can distinguish it from a key 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?

It tells the agent when this tool is the right choice: when real per-item prices from Five Guys' ordering platform are needed. It also contrasts the alternative endpoint /fiveguys/menu and explains that the id comes from /fiveguys/ordering-locations while clarifying which other Five Guys endpoint ids it does NOT correspond to.

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