get_suggestions

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

With no annotations provided, the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic function. It fails to mention whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or any side effects. The minimal phrasing offers no additional insight into how the tool behaves.

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 that communicates the essential purpose without any extraneous words. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and easy to process.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits information about the output structure (e.g., whether results are strings or objects), which would be helpful for the agent to understand the return format. Slight improvement needed.

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?

Although the input schema has 100% description coverage, the parameter description only provides an example value ('madrid'). The tool description adds context that the query is for location suggestions, which gives semantic meaning beyond the schema, but it does not elaborate on the expected format or constraints, resulting in adequate but not exceptional value.

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's purpose with a specific verb 'get' and resource 'location suggestions', explicitly indicating autocomplete functionality. It is distinct from sibling tools list_properties and property_details, which focus on properties rather than location suggestions.

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. It does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or conditions under which this tool should be preferred, leaving the agent without explicit context.

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