enrich_place

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It reveals the data returned (website, phone, hours, editorial summary) and the cost implication ('Billed at a higher tier'), adding context beyond the schema. It does not discuss error handling or id validity, but for a simple fetch, this 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and data fields, followed by a concise cost/usage warning. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or fluff.

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's simplicity (one param, no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: what is fetched, from where, and when to use it. It does not describe return structure, but that is not expected without an output schema. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 describes the sole parameter as 'Google place ID from a search_dining shortlist entry' with 100% coverage. The description reinforces this by mentioning 'shortlisted place' and 'shortlist entries', adding clarity to the expected input source without unnecessary detail.

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 tool's function: 'Fetch Google Place Details' with specific fields (website, phone, hours, editorial summary). It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by focusing on a single shortlisted place rather than listing options.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'call only for shortlist entries' and warns about the higher billing tier compared to search. This implicitly directs users to use search_dining for initial listing and this tool for enrichment, making the when-to-use context clear.

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