opentable_get_restaurant

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint:true, consistent with description. Description adds behavioral details: supports three input formats (slug, path, URL), handles legacy /{slug} venues, and explains that numeric ids are unsupported. No contradictions.

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?

Single, well-structured sentence with colon separating summary from specifics. Every clause adds distinct value: purpose, input format guidance, and note about legacy venues. No unnecessary 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?

No output schema, but description enumerates the returned fields: cuisine, price band, description, address, hours, phone, payment options, features, rating/review count, and availability_token (with usage note). Sufficient for an agent to understand what details are retrieved.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed parameter description. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining that passing the search result's 'url' verbatim always resolves and mentions legacy venue paths. Baseline 3, plus extra context gives 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?

The description specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'full details for a single OpenTable restaurant', listing key fields (cuisine, price band, etc.). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like opentable_search_restaurants (which returns list) and others.

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 states it accepts slug, path, or URL from opentable_search_restaurants, advising to pass the search result's 'url' verbatim. Warns that numeric IDs result in 404. Provides context for use before booking. Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the guidance is clear.

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