local_business_data

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It conveys a read-oriented data tool and adds context like 'Includes contact info where available', but it does not mention rate limits, authentication, pagination, error behavior, or response format. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

Although long, the description is well-structured and front-loaded with a summary. Each operation is listed with its required parameters; there is no filler. The minor typo 'Buisness' does not detract from clarity.

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 high complexity (15 operations) and no output schema, the description adequately covers operation selection and parameter requirements. It falls short on describing return values or response structure, which would be helpful for such a data-heavy tool.

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 only defines 'operation' and a generic 'args' object. The description enumerates every operation with its required parameters (e.g., search_in_area requires query, lat, lng, zoom), adding crucial semantics that the schema does not provide.

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 identifies Google Maps business and place data as the resource, uses specific verbs (search, reviews, photos, reverse geocoding), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like yelp_business_data and trustpilot_company_and_reviews.

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?

An explicit 'When to use' section states this is the primary tool for local business/place data from Google Maps and directs to yelp_business_data and trustpilot_company_and_reviews for alternatives, providing clear decision guidance.

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