wingstop_delivery_store

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does well by stating that it returns a single store, includes drive time, returns 404 when no store delivers, and exposes a slug usable by another endpoint. It does not detail the full response shape, but for a lookup tool this is sufficient.

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 four short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, then return behavior, error behavior, and downstream usage follow in a logical order. Every sentence adds actionable 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?

For a tool with six required address/location parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core invocation needs: what it does, what it returns, what happens on failure, and how to use the result. It is slightly incomplete only in not addressing alternative sibling tools or more detailed response fields.

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 every parameter already has a clear meaning. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond calling these values a 'delivery address,' which is already reflected in the schema. This matches the baseline for full 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Find the Wingstop store that delivers to an address.' It further clarifies the exact output (single store plus drive time), the 404 error case, and how the returned slug is used, which clearly differentiates it from siblings like wingstop_store or wingstop_nearby.

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 gives clear context for when to call it: whenever you need the Wingstop store that delivers to a given address. It also provides chaining guidance by explaining that the returned slug can be passed to /wingstop/menu with service_mode=delivery. It stops short of explicitly naming when not to use it or mentioning alternative sibling tools.

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