tock_search

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that the tool is a best-effort stub returning guidance and a link rather than live data, which is critical behavioral context beyond the basic search action.

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 one sentence plus a brief note, with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the note earns its place by conveying a key limitation.

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 simple single-parameter stub tool, the description adequately covers purpose, output type, and limitation. However, it lacks any detail on acceptable input formats or what the direct link points to, leaving minor gaps.

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 0% and the description does not elaborate on what the 'query' parameter should contain. While the param name is self-explanatory, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema field name.

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 states 'Search Tock venues' with a specific verb and resource, and the 'Tock' scope clearly distinguishes it from Resy-focused sibling tools. The note about being a stub does not detract from purpose clarity.

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 implies Tock is the target and notes the stub limitation, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus discover_restaurants or resy_search. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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