grubhub_restaurant_menu

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It reveals the output contract in detail: categorized items, distinct delivery/pickup/base prices, min/max price bounds, availability, tags, images, and dual currency representations. It also flags a data quirk ('genuinely differ') and avoids any contradiction with structured fields.

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 front-loaded with the core action and resource, then each sentence adds a distinct piece of output semantics (grouping, prices, item attributes, units). No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential return shape: categories, per-item price variants, min/max bounds, description, popularity, availability, tags, images, and value units. It does not discuss error cases or locality, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents both restaurant_id and include_unavailable. The description adds useful output context about prices and item fields, but does not need to explain the parameters further; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get one Grubhub restaurant's menu with prices.' It further narrows the scope to a single restaurant's full menu grouped into categories, which separates it from broader Grubhub tools like grubhub_restaurant or grubhub_search.

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 intended use is implied: when you need a single Grubhub restaurant's menu with prices. There is no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternative, but the resource and output description make the selection case reasonably clear.

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