ubereats_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is credential-free public data, states the return fields, and describes the two behavioral modes. This is transparent for a read-only search tool. It doesn't cover rate limits or error behavior, but those aren't critical for the described functionality, and the description provides substantial 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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and includes return fields and usage notes without unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes value, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 is quite complete for a search tool without an output schema: it lists the return fields, explains the two invocation modes, and notes credential-free access. It doesn't explicitly discuss pagination or limits, but those are already captured in the parameter schema. This is strong coverage for the tool's complexity.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented structurally. The description adds extra semantics by explaining the query parameter's dual role (keyword or omitted for feed) and the offset usage nuance, but it doesn't go beyond what the schema already communicates for most parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 the tool searches UberEats restaurants and returns specific fields (name, rating, review count, delivery estimate, cuisine tags, image). It also explains the two modes (keyword search vs. browsing the general feed) and distinguishes from related tools like ubereats_feed by emphasizing location-based delivery and optional keyword. This is a specific verb+resource with strong scoping.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool: to find restaurants delivering to a location, with or without a keyword. It clarifies the difference between keyword search and browsing the general feed. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like ubereats_store for details, the context is clear and there are no misleading exclusions.

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