tripadvisor_place

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds meaningful context: the data source (public place HTML), the differentiated fast path for certain page types, and the use of browser fallbacks when direct HTML is blocked. This goes beyond a simple 'get' tool and helps an agent anticipate potential delays or source variations, though it doesn't cover error cases or normalization specifics.

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, with a clear front-loaded purpose ('Get TripAdvisor place') followed by a single sentence of behavioral context. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or 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?

The description explains what the tool returns and some behavioral nuances, but it omits how the two optional parameters ('id' and 'url') are meant to be used—for example, whether one is required or takes precedence. With no output schema, an agent would benefit from more explicit input guidance to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% description coverage for both parameters ('id' and 'url'), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no parameter-level details, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high.

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 a specific resource ('TripAdvisor place'), and specifies the return as a 'rich normalized TripAdvisor place profile.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on place profiles, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other TripAdvisor tools like tripadvisor_hotels or tripadvisor_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 description provides some context about behavior—such as a faster dedicated lookup for destination and bookable tour/experience pages, and configured browser fallbacks when HTML is blocked—but it never explicitly states when to use this tool over alternative TripAdvisor tools or provides when-not-to-use guidance. The usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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