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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the output fields (description, store type, tags, hours, region, open_now) and documents the open_now filter, but does not mention pagination limits, rate limits, or behavior when no results are found.

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 three sentences, concise and front-loaded. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains parameters, and the third describes output. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool has 10 parameters (none required) and an output schema, the description covers key use cases: location vs city/state input, common filters, and output fields. It lacks sorting or combinability of inputs, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to use 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It effectively explains the lat/lng pairs, optional radius_miles, alternative city/state input, and gives examples for region_tag and tag. It clarifies that records include certain fields. However, it omits explanation of limit and offset parameters.

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 clearly states the tool finds Indian grocery stores and includes specific details about input options (location or city/state) and filters (region_tag, tag, open_now). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_grocery_details which returns details for a single store.

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 specifies when to provide a point vs city/state and mentions optional filters, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative search tools (e.g., search_groceries_by_text) or state when not to use this tool.

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