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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: results are sorted by distance, delivery is same-day, the radius is 2 km, and shipping costs 25 MXN. It stops short of describing behavior when no location is supplied or what an empty result means.

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 dense sentences: the first front-loads the core capability and geography, the second supplies the delivery mechanics. The category parenthetical earns its place by defining the inventory scope, and nothing is redundant.

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 read-only discovery tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly and understand the commercial model behind the results. The remaining gap is what happens when no location filter is provided, given zero required parameters.

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% and every parameter already carries a description with an example, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description reinforces the Guadalajara scope of colonia/codigo_postal and explains that ordering derives from location, but adds no format or precedence rules (e.g., which param wins if both are given).

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 ("Encuentra") plus resource ("negocios locales") and scopes it geographically to Guadalajara delivery zones, with concrete business categories that make the result type unmistakable. It implicitly separates itself from siblings like buscar_productos (products) and ver_tiendita (single shop) by naming the resource, but never explicitly contrasts with them.

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?

Usage is implied by the delivery framing: an agent can infer this is the discovery step before ver_tiendita or agregar_al_carrito. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of alternatives such as buscar_productos for item-level search, and no indication that at least one of colonia/codigo_postal is needed even though all three params are marked optional.

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