toast_get_restaurant_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Get' implies a read operation, but the description does not state side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or what 'configuration information' includes beyond the name.

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 sentence with no filler, and the core action and object are front-loaded. It is concise, though somewhat under-specified.

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 getter tool with one undocumented optional parameter and no output schema, the description should explain the parameter and the scope of 'configuration information.' It does neither, leaving an agent to guess what the tool returns and 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the only parameter, restaurantGuid, has an empty description. The tool description does not explain what restaurantGuid means, whether it is required despite being optional in the schema, or what happens when it is omitted.

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 uses a clear verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('detailed restaurant configuration information'), so an agent can tell this is about retrieving restaurant config details. However, it does not specify which aspects of configuration are included, and it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like toast_get_delivery_settings or toast_list_accessible_restaurants.

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. The description provides no context about prerequisites, whether the optional restaurantGuid must be supplied, or when a sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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