cities_by_coordinates_largest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether multiple cities are returned, how 'near' is defined, sorting details beyond population, or any limitations like radius. Key behavioral traits are missing.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and result ordering.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain the return format, but it does not. It lacks details on result count, city identifiers, or distance criteria. For a tool that returns a list of cities, more context is needed for full completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, providing basic descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's field descriptions, which are already minimal (e.g., 'Latitude'). Baselined at 3 due to high coverage.

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 the largest cities near coordinates, ordered by population, distinguishing it from the sibling 'cities_by_coordinates_closest' which returns closest cities. The verb 'Find' and resource 'largest cities' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'find_cities_near_city' or 'cities_distance'. The description does not mention exclusions or preferred contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and sibling list.

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