place_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses what the tool returns but does not explicitly state whether the operation is side-effect-free, require auth, or mention rate limits. The read-only nature is implied by 'Full detail' but not explicitly confirmed.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that names the action, the key parameter, and the returned fields. Every word earns its place with no unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity, one parameter, and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the prerequisite (where place_id comes from), the lookup target, and the concrete detail fields returned, leaving no critical invocation gap.

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?

The only parameter, place_id, is given meaningful context by noting it comes from place_search or geocode. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this added provenance is valuable, though it could further clarify the ID format.

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 specifies the exact action ('Full detail for one place') and the resource ('by place_id'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like place_search and geocode by enumerating the detail fields (hours, phone, rating, etc.). This is a clear verb+resource with sibling differentiation.

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 clearly states that place_id comes from place_search or geocode, signaling the correct upstream tools and when to use this lookup. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling set makes the intended usage obvious.

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