get_place_details

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes what is returned (reviews, amenities, etc.) but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, rate limits, or error conditions. The description is not misleading but incomplete for a no-annotation scenario.

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?

Well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by usage hint and a detailed Args/Returns breakdown. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with the main action, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly enumerates return fields (basic info, top reviews, amenities, opening hours). Parameter coverage is complete with example. The tool is simple (1 param), and the description leaves no significant gaps for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the result.

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 has 0% description coverage (no parameter description for place_id), but the description provides the meaning: 'Google Place ID' with a concrete example. This fully compensates for the schema gap, adding critical context beyond the raw schema.

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?

Explicitly states it gets detailed information about a place by Google Place ID. Clearly differentiates from sibling 'search_places' by specifying 'after finding it with search_places' and lists specific additional info (reviews, amenities, editorial summaries). Verb+resource+scope is precise and distinct.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to get more details about a place after finding it with search_places', establishing a clear usage sequence. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools like geocode/reverse_geocode, but the context is sufficient for correct selection.

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