Place details

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

The annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by listing what details are returned and explaining the shape of `hours`, `menu`, and `photos`, though it does not discuss error or freshness 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 front-loaded with the tool's core purpose and remains compact. Each subsequent sentence carries useful scoping, return-field, or sibling-routing information without redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately enumerates the returned information and clarifies important field semantics like weekday hours formats and photo URLs. It also covers where the required id comes from and when to use sibling tools for related tasks.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter definitions themselves are well documented. The description adds meaningful provenance for `id` by naming additional valid sibling sources beyond the schema, though it does not add much about the `photos` and `reviews` count parameters.

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 and resource: 'Get one place's full details from Balad', then enumerates the exact returned fields. It clearly distinguishes this from siblings such as bl_reviews and bl_route by directing those use cases elsewhere.

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?

It states where the required `id` comes from and explicitly routes the agent to bl_reviews for more reviews and bl_route for directions. It does not spell out a when-not-to-use condition against bl_search or bl_nearby, but the usage context is clear.

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