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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral detail beyond that: results are ordered nearest-first, distances are expressed in miles, and each result carries full store detail. It stops short of noting pagination or radius defaults, which the schema supplies.

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 sentence that front-loads the resource and the locational input, then appends ordering and return-shape detail. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a read-only nearby-search tool with an output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers what it does, how results are ordered, and what each result contains. The missing piece is routing guidance against the many overlapping Sonic location 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 page, limit, radius, latitude, and longitude are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no formatting or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Sonic Drive-In restaurants near a latitude/longitude') and adds scope (proximity search, nearest-first ordering). This implicitly separates it from directory-style siblings like sonic_locations or sonic_directory, but no sibling is named 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?

There is no statement of when to prefer this tool over sonic_locations, sonic_directory, sonic_store, or sonic_location_suggest, and no conditions or exclusions are given. The only hint is the proximity framing, which the agent must infer.

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