get_business

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that only the top 10 reviews are returned, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention any side effects, authorization requirements, or other behavioral aspects beyond what is listed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently captures the tool's purpose and key outputs. No redundant or unnecessary words.

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 the presence of an output schema and a simple single-parameter input, the description is largely complete. It covers the main return elements, though it omits details like slug case sensitivity or uniqueness. The output schema can supplement return value details.

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 input schema has one parameter (slug) with zero description coverage. The description only says 'by slug' without explaining what a slug is, its format, or how to obtain it. This provides minimal added meaning; the agent would need external knowledge to use the parameter correctly.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves full details of a single business using its slug, enumerating included fields (location, contact info, categories, top 10 reviews). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_reviews (focused on reviews) and list_businesses (lists multiple businesses).

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?

Usage is implied: use when you need a specific business's details given its slug. However, no explicit guidance is provided on when not to use this tool (e.g., if slug is unknown, search would be better) or comparisons with sibling tools.

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