Look up an Untappd venue by Foursquare id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'Read-only' and explains the output can be passed to other tools, which is useful context, but it does not go beyond that with other behavioral details like 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?

Three short sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence contributes: what it does, why it is useful, and its safety property.

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 single-parameter read-only lookup, the description is complete. It explains the input, the output, the practical use case, and how to chain it with related tools, even in the absence of an output schema.

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% for the single parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds practical context by giving an example source of the ID (a check-in) and explaining how the resolved venue is used downstream, which is genuinely helpful beyond the schema's simple 'Foursquare venue id'.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Resolve') and names both the input (Foursquare venue id) and output (Untappd venue). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools by specifying this is a cross-reference lookup, not a search or info tool.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when you have a foursquare_id, e.g. from a check-in, and want to resolve it to an Untappd venue. It also points to follow-up tools (untappd_venue_info / untappd_venue_activity), though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives.

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