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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden; it notes a 200m radius and price per call, but lacks details on pagination, ordering, or geographical coordinate system, which are typical for such spatial queries.

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?

Two sentences: first delivers the core purpose and output, second the critical cost; no superfluous text.

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 an output schema and simple single-parameter input, description is adequate, but lacks explicit return type description (though output schema exists) and doesn't mention errors or limits beyond price.

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 0% and no enum values; the description helps by explaining the gnaf_id is the subject identifier, though it does not explicitly name the parameter – context implies 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?

States a specific verb ('Every GNAF property') and resource ('within 200 m of the subject'), with lat/lng and mesh block details, clearly distinguishing it from broader context tools like properties_context_mesh_blocks.

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?

Implies use for finding nearby properties, but does not explicitly state when to choose this vs alternatives like properties_surroundings_parcels or properties_neighbours, so some inference is required.

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