resy_event_detail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly states 'Credential-free, read-only discovery -- does not purchase a ticket,' which clearly discloses authentication needs, side effects, and safety. It also specifies the return contents: full description, event-day instructions, and per-tier package breakdown with live availability.

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 three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the purpose, then return details, then parameter provenance, and ends with the credential/safety note. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 the moderate complexity of a 4-parameter detail-fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs: purpose, return value summary, parameter source, and safety profile. The optional party_size parameter is documented in the schema, so no critical context 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter meaning and provenance. The description reinforces that all three identifiers come from a prior resy-events result, but this largely repeats what the schema descriptions already state. It adds no significant new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Get a Resy ticketed dining event's full description and ticket packages.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from resy_events by stating it consumes a prior resy-events result and returns detail-level data rather than a list. The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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 clearly establishes the tool's usage context: it should be called with identifiers from a prior resy-events result, including the same location identifier. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions, but the dependency on resy-events is a clear contextual guideline.

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