resy_get_venue

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates the safe read-only nature. The description adds the expectation that 'full details' will be returned, but it does not disclose any further behavioral traits such as payload size, response format, required authentication, or rate limits. This is acceptable but minimal.

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 clear sentence with no filler or irrelevant details. The verb, resource, and key parameter are front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple read-only get-by-id tool, the description is minimally viable, but without an output schema it leaves 'full details' vague. It does not enumerate what venue attributes are included, nor does it mention how to obtain a valid venue_id from sibling tools. This is functional but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining venue_id. It only repeats 'by id' and does not clarify where the ID comes from, how it identifies the venue, or what values are expected beyond the schema's integer type. The parameter semantics are therefore only minimally conveyed.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), the resource ('Resy venue'), and the scope ('single ... by id'), making the operation unambiguous. It is clearly distinct from search/list siblings because it targets one venue by ID and promises 'full details'.

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 no guidance about when to choose this tool over resy_search_venues or other venue-related tools. It only implies that a venue_id is required, without stating that the ID likely comes from a prior search or that this tool should be used for fetching a single venue's complete details.

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