ta_web_get_location

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

The annotations already signal read-only and open-world behavior, and the description adds meaningful context: it reads from the public page via the browser bridge, requires no API key, and does not return individual review text. This goes beyond what the annotations convey, though it does not discuss failure modes or rate limits.

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 three sentences with no wasted words: the first defines the operation and outputs, the second gives the alternative-selection condition, and the third clarifies scope and exclusions. Important information is front-loaded.

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 a single documented parameter, read-only/open-world annotations, and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it names the returned fields, the data source, the no-API-key condition, supported place types, and a key exclusion. An agent can select and invoke this 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?

There is only one parameter and the schema already documents it fully ("TripAdvisor location ID (from a search tool)"). The description repeats that the lookup is by location ID but adds no new parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Get a TripAdvisor location's core details" and lists the exact fields returned. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling ta_get_location_details by noting it reads via the browser bridge and works without an API key, and from review tools by explicitly excluding review text.

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 an explicit condition: "use this when ta_get_location_details is unavailable or its key is blocked." It also clarifies the entity coverage (attractions, hotels, restaurants) and the exclusion of review text, giving clear when-to-use guidance relative to siblings.

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