List restaurants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value by disclosing exactly what each entry contains — address, operator, menu link, and a data-completeness signal for diet/allergen data — which tells the agent how far this list can be trusted for allergen filtering.

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, both earning their place: the first builds the value proposition and returned fields, the second handles the routing exclusion. Nothing is buried in the middle.

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 zero params, full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description only needs to cover purpose, scope and routing — all present. No behavioral detail an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. It adds no misleading param-like language.

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?

A specific verb (List) plus a precisely bounded resource (LUT Skinnarila campus lunch restaurants covered by this server). It also enumerates the returned fields, including 'ids for the other tools', which immediately distinguishes it from its siblings.

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?

States an explicit exclusion ('No menus') and names the exact alternatives (get_menu, find_dishes) that cover that case. It also implies the intended role of the call, discovery of restaurant ids for the other tools.

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