tock_search_restaurants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds context about what fields are returned and that slots are not included, which is useful. However, no additional disclosures about rate limits or pagination are given, hence 4.

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 concise sentences. First sentence states purpose and inputs; second sentence summarizes output and limitations. No waste, front-loaded with critical info.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains return fields (cuisine, price band, neighborhood, slug) and what is missing (bookable slots). This is complete for a search 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions. The description adds value by explaining that metro comes from tock_list_metros, query is free-text and server-side, and limit defaults to 50 (not in schema). This goes beyond the 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?

The description clearly states 'List / search restaurants in a Tock metro', specifies required inputs (metro slug) and outputs (venues with cuisine, price band, neighborhood, Tock slug), and distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning what it does NOT include (bookable slots).

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use metro slug from tock_list_metros, mentions optional text query, and directs user to other tools for details (tock_get_restaurant / tock_get_availability) and for slots (excluded). This leaves no ambiguity.

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