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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds a concrete behavioral fact beyond them: coordinates and internal metadata are omitted from the results, which tells the agent what the response will and won't contain.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the purpose before the usage condition, with no wasted clauses.

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 needn't be re-explained; annotations cover safety. Purpose, usage timing, and the omission note together give an agent everything needed to call this single-param lookup correctly.

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 0% and the single 'term' param is undocumented in the schema. The description partially compensates by defining the term as a city, state, or ZIP, which is meaningful, but gives no format or matching-behavior detail.

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 (Resolve) and resource (city/state/ZIP term -> Healthgrades location suggestions) and scopes it to the pre-provider-search workflow. It is distinguishable from generic siblings like healthgrades_autocomplete, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

'Use when a search needs a location; before provider search' gives clear context for invocation. It lacks an explicit when-not clause or named alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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