转换为高德坐标

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, which cover safety and idempotency. The description adds the 40-point batch limit and specifies the conversion output target (GCJ-02) and source-to-API mapping (e.g., WGS84->gps), providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and key constraint (limit of 40). Every word adds value; no redundant information.

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's simplicity, the description, annotations, and output schema (present) together cover all necessary information: input types, conversion destination, limit, safety, and idempotency. No gaps for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). The description adds meaning by stating the batch limit (matching maxItems) and clarifying the 'from' enum values (e.g., 'WGS84 对应高德 API 的 gps'), which goes 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?

The description clearly states the tool converts WGS84/GPS, Baidu, or Mapbar coordinates to Gaode's GCJ-02, with a limit of 40 points. It provides a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle directions, geocoding, etc.

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 clearly implies when to use (coordinate conversion to GCJ-02) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or mention alternatives. Since no sibling tool does conversion, the context is sufficient but lacks exclusion criteria.

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