get_directions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure burden. It discloses the core behavior (turn-by-turn directions, distance, duration, instructions) and geographic scope, but omits details like rate limits, authentication, data freshness, or error conditions (e.g., points outside India). Adequate but not thorough.

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 action and includes all essential details. No extraneous words; every part 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 params, no output schema, many siblings), the description covers the key return values and scope. It could briefly mention how it differs from 'get_directions_with_traffic' or place itself among other direction tools, but overall it provides sufficient context for basic use.

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 100%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds context about the outputs (distance, duration, instructions) and modes (driving/biking/walking) but does not enrich parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 provides turn-by-turn directions for driving, biking, or walking between two points in India, returning distance, duration, and step-by-step instructions. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('directions'), and the mention of modes and scope distinguishes it from generic direction tools, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling 'get_directions_with_traffic'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_directions_with_traffic', 'distance_matrix', or other siblings. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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