Yellowpages Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior, but it reveals nothing beyond the endpoint name. It does not mention execution modes, async behavior, webhooks, result shape, pagination, rate limits, or what data is returned. The phrase 'documented endpoint' punts all useful context to an unspecified external reference.

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 text is short, but shortness here is under-specification, not conciseness. The single sentence earns no real informational value because it merely rephrases the title and references an endpoint. It is a placeholder-level description.

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?

Despite the output schema and fully documented parameters, the description leaves out critical context for a tool with 9 parameters, async/sync execution, deprecated flags, enrichment, and webhooks. The phrase 'documented endpoint' is not a substitute for telling an agent what the tool does, how it behaves, and when to reach for it.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all nine parameters and their purposes. The description adds zero param-level meaning, but because the schema carries the burden, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 restates the tool name and title almost verbatim: 'Search Yellowpages with the documented /yellowpages-search endpoint.' It names a verb and resource, but provides no semantic differentiation from sibling tools such as businesses_search, google_maps_search, or yelp_reviews. It reads as a tautology rather than a substantive definition.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention use cases, exclusions, prerequisites, or how it relates to the many sibling search and data tools. The only implicit signal is that it searches Yellowpages, which is too weak to support correct tool selection.

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