google_maps_photos: GET /

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

Discloses key behaviors: pagination, category filtering, returned fields (image URL, thumbnail, upload date, uploader, photoId). No side effects are mentioned, but as a read-only fetch, the description 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?

Front-loaded with purpose, followed by clear explanation and bulleted use cases. Could trim redundant phrasing, but overall well-structured and not overly verbose.

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?

Covers output fields, pagination, filtering, and use cases. Lacks mention of the 'hl' parameter and error behavior, but given the tool's simplicity and no output schema, it is fairly complete.

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?

Adds value beyond schema by enumerating category filter options (all, latest, menu, etc.) and explaining pagination. Schema already covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3; the extra detail justifies a 4.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fetches the photo gallery of a Google Maps place by dataId or placeId', using a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., search, reviews) by focusing on photos.

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?

Provides explicit use cases (e.g., restaurant-menu extraction, visual audits) but does not mention when not to use or contrast with alternatives like other Google Maps tools.

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