zernio_get_gmb_attributes

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

The description implies a read-only operation with 'Get', but no annotations are provided to confirm safety. It does not disclose any potential side effects, permissions, or rate limits. For a simple read, this is adequate but minimal.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key action and resource, with parenthetical examples. Every word is essential and nothing is extraneous.

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 tool is a simple retrieval with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately communicates what is retrieved. It would benefit from hinting at the return format (e.g., list of attributes), but overall it is nearly complete for this complexity level.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both 'accountId' and 'locationId'. The tool description adds context about the target (business attributes) but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'business attributes for a Google My Business location'. It provides specific examples (amenities, accessibility) to clarify what attributes are included, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'zernio_get_gmb_location_details' which likely retrieves broader location info.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., vs. 'zernio_get_gmb_location_details' or 'zernio_get_gmb_reviews'). No prerequisites or context are mentioned beyond the implied need for accountId and locationId from the schema.

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