toast_get_online_ordering_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The words 'check' and 'get' imply a read-only operation, and the description states the output focus: enabled status and scheduling info. However, it does not explicitly confirm non-mutation, permissions, or response behavior.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary purpose, though the 'scheduling info' phrase is vague and could be more precise without losing conciseness.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is too thin. It does not explain restaurantGuid, what scheduling info means, what the returned status looks like, or any prerequisites. An agent could select the tool but not confidently know how to invoke it 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?

There is one parameter, restaurantGuid, with an empty schema description and 0% schema description coverage. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, so an agent receives no explanation of what value to supply or whether the optional Guid is needed for a specific restaurant.

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 identifies the operation: checking whether online ordering is enabled and retrieving scheduling information. This is a specific verb+resource combination that sets it apart from most siblings, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similarly named tools like toast_get_delivery_settings.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many related restaurant, ordering, and delivery tools listed as siblings, the description gives no conditions, exclusions, or recommendations for selection.

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