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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses active-listing filtering, default distance ordering, and that an empty array means no active matches within the radius, but it does not explicitly state read-only/side-effect-free behavior, permissions, or rate limits.

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 front-loaded with purpose and then briefly covers parameters, ordering, and empty-result behavior. It is tight, though 'using the existing PostGIS distance search' is implementation detail and 'distance ordering is the default' repeats the schema default.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-format details are not needed, and schema coverage is high. But with no annotations, the description should do more to establish when to use this tool versus search_listings and to disclose safety or permission context; those gaps keep it from being complete.

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 schema already documents latitude, longitude, radius_km, sort, and category. The description restates that latitude and longitude are separate decimal degrees, radius_km is required in kilometers, and category is optional, but adds little beyond the schema's own parameter 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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Find active listings near a geographic point', with a clear spatial scope and method. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like search_listings or explain when spatial search is preferable, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 use when a latitude, longitude, and radius are available, and notes optional category narrowing. However, it never mentions alternatives such as search_listings or when not to use this tool, leaving routing guidance absent.

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