maps_place_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool returns detailed data including contact info, hours, and reviews, and the 'Get' framing implies a read-only operation. It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but those are not typically expected for a straightforward lookup tool.

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 a single concise sentence with a parenthetical list of data categories. It is front-loaded with the core action and provides immediate clarity without any wasted words.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup tool, the description covers the goal, the required input, and the nature of returned data. An agent can infer when and how to use the tool, though the exact return structure is not enumerated.

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 already documents the single place_id parameter with 100% coverage, including its origin. The description only references place_id without adding further semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so it stays at the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get', identifies the resource ('detailed information about a specific place'), and specifies the input ('by its place_id'). It clearly communicates what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like maps_search_places or maps_geocode beyond the unique place_id input.

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 that this tool is for retrieving details once a place_id is already known. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the parameter description ('from maps_search_places or maps_geocode') implies a workflow of first obtaining a place_id and then calling this tool.

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