Get Untappd venue detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that it is read-only (redundant) and explains the compact toggle's impact on output. Some additional behavioral context beyond annotations, but not extensive.

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 sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose and output fields; second sentence provides ID source and notes read-only nature. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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 enumerates key return fields (category, address, etc.) and explains the compact parameter's effect. This is sufficient for a simple read-only venue detail tool, though could mention venue name or other common fields.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the compact parameter's effect on the output (slimmer record without embedded activity), which goes beyond the schema's field description.

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 the tool retrieves full venue details by ID, listing specific return fields (category, address, contact, rating, check-ins, and optionally top beers/activity). It distinguishes from sibling tools like untappd_search_venue which only returns IDs.

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?

Explicitly states how to obtain the venue ID via untappd_search_venue and notes the compact parameter's effect. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use, the read-only nature and ID requirement provide clear context for appropriate use.

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