find_entities_in_region

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Find' suggests a read-only lookup, but the description does not disclose the return format, whether the search is limited to a coordinate space or model, how bounding boxes are computed, or any performance or scope characteristics.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and the selection rule directly.

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 spatial query tool with four undocumented numeric parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits coordinate semantics, return shape, and scope of the search, which an agent needs to invoke it 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 the four numeric parameters. It alludes to a 'region' but does not specify that x1/y1 and x2/y2 are corner coordinates, their order, whether they are min/max, units, or coordinate system, leaving the parameters largely ambiguous.

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 states a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('entities'), plus the precise selection criterion ('bounding boxes intersect the given region'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling lookups like find_entities_by_layer or find_entities_by_property, though it does not name those alternatives 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?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this spatial query versus other entity-listing tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The only implied context is that the caller already has a region, which is minimal.

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