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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral traits. It only states the action (search + extraction) without disclosing whether it is read-only, what permissions are needed, rate limits, or side effects. The description is too minimal to inform safe and accurate invocation.

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, efficient sentence. However, it lacks structure (no breakdown of behavior or parameters) and is too sparse to be fully helpful. It is not verbose, but the conciseness comes at the cost of clarity and completeness.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter descriptions, the description must provide comprehensive context. It only gives a high-level purpose (search + extraction) but omits return format, parameter usage, and example scenarios. The tool is underspecified for reliable agent use.

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%, so the description must add meaning to parameters. It mentions 'location-targeted' but does not explain which parameter controls location (likely 'country' or part of 'q'). No clarification on 'q' (search query), 'limit' (pagination), or 'country' (restriction). The description fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'Location-targeted search with place-link extraction' clearly identifies the tool as a search function with location targeting and extraction of place links. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search' (general search) and 'place' (likely place details). However, the exact meaning of 'place-link extraction' is slightly ambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search' or 'place'. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for deciding between siblings. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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