Search Yelp business reviews by keyword, returning highlighted excerpts per match. Requires business ID and search term.
Search Yelp business reviews by keyword. Searches a Yelp business's reviews for a keyword, returning a highlighted excerpt per match.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Yelp business alias or encoded id | |
| term | Yes | Keyword to search reviews for |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return format ('a highlighted excerpt per match') but says nothing about authentication, rate limits, result count, or pagination.
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?
Two sentences, with the purpose front-loaded. However, the second sentence largely restates the first ('Searches a Yelp business's reviews for a keyword') before adding the one new detail about highlighted excerpts, so there is redundancy.
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 simple 2-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits practical call context such as how the business id is obtained and how many matches are returned, which matters given there is no output schema.
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% for both params (id, term), so the schema already documents them fully. The description adds no meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb (search) and resource (Yelp business reviews) scoped by keyword, and notes the return shape ('a highlighted excerpt per match'). Clear on its own, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like yelp_business_reviews or yelp_business_review_highlights.
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 'by keyword' qualifier implies the use case but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative. An agent choosing among several Yelp review tools gets no routing help.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.