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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it resolves a location from free text, which is the core behavior, but does not detail the output format, potential errors, or edge cases. This is adequate given the annotations, but not rich.

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, concise sentence that efficiently states the tool's function and purpose. There is no wasted information or redundancy, and it is front-loaded with the verb 'Resolve'.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description covers the purpose and input, but does not mention the output structure (e.g., what the resolved location looks like). Given the annotations cover safety and the tool's low complexity, it is largely complete, though a note on return format would improve it.

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 schema has one parameter, 'query' of type string, with 0% schema description coverage. The description explains it accepts 'free text' (texto livre), which adds meaningful semantics beyond the type. It clarifies the expected input format, though it does not provide examples or constraints.

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 states the tool 'resolves a location (city/state/geo) from free text' and its purpose is to filter searches by region. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like webmotors_search and webmotors_filters, which perform different actions (searching and filtering).

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 description implies usage for filtering search by region, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or mention sibling tools. It gives some context (preprocessing for regional filtering) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it.

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