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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true) and an output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral hint by identifying the backend as 'Panera's public locator geocoder,' signaling Panera-scoped coverage rather than a fully general geocoder.

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 sentences with no filler; the purpose is front-loaded and the sibling routing follows immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter, read-only geocoding tool with annotations and an output schema already present, the description supplies everything needed: what it resolves, the backend scope, and how it relates to the other nearby-lookup 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?

With one parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents 'address' fully. The description's phrasing ('free-text address, city, or postal code') mirrors the schema description and adds no new syntax or format guidance, 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?

States a specific verb (resolve) and resource (free-text address/city/postal code) via Panera's locator geocoder, and explicitly distinguishes itself from panera_locations, panera_cafe, and geocoding_lookup. An agent can tell what this does without opening the schema.

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?

Names three sibling alternatives and what each is for (nearby cafes, single cafe, general-purpose lookup), which routes the agent well. It stops short of stating the explicit condition that selects this tool (e.g., 'use before panera_locations to turn an address into coordinates'), so it's clear but not fully prescriptive.

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