propertiesget_nearby_deprecated

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits like permissions needed, rate limits, data freshness, or error handling. It mentions 'nearest' but doesn't clarify how proximity is calculated or if results are paginated, leaving key operational details unclear.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste, front-loading the core purpose. It's appropriately sized for the tool's apparent simplicity, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 has no annotations, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'points of interest' includes, the format of results, or any constraints, which is inadequate for a tool that likely returns location-based data and requires proper context for effective 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 documents the 'listing_id' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying it's used to locate points of interest, which is minimal value. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'nearest points of interest', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'house_pricesget_points_of_interest_deprecated', which appears similar but may differ in scope or data source, leaving room for confusion.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the sibling 'house_pricesget_points_of_interest_deprecated'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios, offering minimal help for selection.

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