Get Restaurant Details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully lists the kinds of data returned (address, hours, minimum order, delivery info), which compensates for the missing output schema. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe error behavior, so behavioral transparency is only partially fulfilled.

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 one concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the main action and packs the key details into a compact list, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple one-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what information will be returned. It could mention how to obtain the restaurant_id or what happens on lookup failure, but those are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema fully documents the single required parameter, including that restaurant_id is 'the vendor code from search results (e.g. 'p7nl')'. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('restaurant details') and enumerates specific fields (address, opening hours, minimum order, delivery info), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_menu or search_restaurants. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the resource scope is precise enough to make the purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'specific restaurant' implies the tool is used when you already have a restaurant identifier, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. It does not mention hunting for alternatives or mention that restaurant_id should come from search_restaurants, leaving usage largely inferred.

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