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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety/open-world profile is covered. The description usefully adds the shape of the result (address, coordinates, hours, cross streets, capability flags), but says nothing about ordering, pagination limits, or empty-radius behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource, the locating input, and the payload in one pass with zero filler.

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 values need no explanation, and the description still summarizes them. For a geo-search tool with fully documented params this is nearly complete, with only pagination/ordering behavior unmentioned.

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 page, page_size, radius, latitude and longitude. The description only hints at radius via 'near a lat/long' and adds no units, defaults, or bounds beyond what the schema provides.

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 resource (Chipotle restaurants) and the key input constraint (near a lat/long), plus the fields returned. An agent can distinguish it from chipotle_restaurant/menu siblings, but the description never names the alternative tools, so differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no routing to alternatives such as chipotle_restaurant (detail by ID) or chipotle_menu. The only usable hint is the lat/long phrasing, which merely restates the required schema fields.

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