Get Untappd venue detail

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety behavior. The description adds 'Read-only' and explains the data scope, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as rate limits, caching, or the meaning of openWorldHint beyond what annotations carry. It does not contradict the annotations, but also does not substantially extend them.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action ('Get full detail'), followed by the key return fields and the id-sourcing hint. Every sentence earns its place, and the 'Read-only' note is a useful quick signal.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately lists the main returned fields and the effect of the 'full' view. It also explains how to obtain the required id. It does not cover every potential edge case or error condition, but for a read-only detail lookup with a well-covered schema, the context is sufficient.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful semantic guidance by pointing to untappd_search_venue as the source for venue_id, and by clarifying the effect of the 'full' view on the returned detail. This exceeds baseline without duplicating 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get full detail for a venue by its Untappd venue id'), lists the fields returned, and clearly distinguishes itself from search-oriented siblings. It also names untappd_search_venue as the upstream id source, making its role in the family obvious.

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 usage context: use this when you already have a venue id and want detailed venue information. It points to untappd_search_venue for obtaining the id, but it does not explicitly state when not to use related tools like untappd_venue_activity or untappd_venue_menu. This is clear context without exclusions, so a 4 is appropriate.

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