toast_list_revenue_centers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only listing operation, but it does not mention pagination, restaurant scoping behavior, authentication needs, or what happens when the optional restaurantGuid is omitted.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the parenthetical examples clarify the resource type efficiently. It is concise, though its brevity leaves out important operational details.

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 one weakly documented optional parameter and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain how the restaurantGuid impacts the result, what fields are returned, or how this list relates to the broader Toast API context.

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 restaurantGuid parameter has an empty description. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, so the agent receives no semantic help about how to supply or interpret it.

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 specific verb, 'List', with a concrete resource, 'revenue centers', and adds clarifying examples ('bars, POS stations, etc.'). It is clear about what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the many sibling list_* tools.

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 the many sibling list tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and the generic 'List all' wording.

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