Outscraper Business Details

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

Without annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly implies a read-only operation via 'Get' and adds useful behavioral nuance: calling without fields returns a full detail payload, while including fields returns a smaller selected payload. It does not mention error behavior or authentication, but for a simple get-by-id tool this is sufficient.

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 well-structured: an opening one-sentence summary, 'Best for' bullets, and a clear do-not-use section. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition, making it easy to scan and parse.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage context, parameter behavior, and relationship to sibling tools. It leaves no significant gaps for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining that omitting fields yields the full detail payload and including fields produces a smaller field-selected payload, which clarifies the practical effect of the fields parameter beyond the schema's 'Specific fields to return.'

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 'Get one business by Outscraper business id,' specifying the exact action and resource. It also distinguishes itself from businesses_search by explicitly positioning this tool for post-search enrichment rather than discovery.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance with 'Best for' bullets and a direct 'Do not use this for discovery' exclusion. It names the alternative tool (businesses_search) and gives a clear workflow: search first, then call businesses_get for a specific id.

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