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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description is not required to restate those. It adds the '5D spatial neighbourhood' context but does not clarify behavioral details such as ordering, default radius behavior, or how the text query maps to coordinates.

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, short sentence with no filler, and the core spatial concept is front-loaded. It is concise but slightly cryptic; 'coordinate address' and '5D spatial neighbourhood' could be clearer without additional explanation.

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 output schema present, annotations covering safety, and full schema parameter coverage, the description does not need to explain return values or safety. However, it leaves the meaning of '5D spatial neighbourhood' and coordinate addressing underspecified, and it offers no routing guidance among the many sibling tools.

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 100%, so the input schema fully documents all four parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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 clearly identifies the resource ('memories') and the operation ('near' a coordinate address), and adds the distinctive '5D spatial neighbourhood' concept. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like memory.vector.search or memory.query, which could also operate over the same space.

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 'near a coordinate address' implies the tool is for spatial proximity lookups, giving some context. But there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use conditions.

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