Open Google Maps Visual Search

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral specifics: map tile URLs are automatically filtered and remaining preview URLs cannot be downloaded. This provides context beyond annotations, though it does not detail the exact opening behavior (e.g., tab creation, return value).

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?

Two sentences, each with clear purpose. The first sentence is front-loaded with the main action, and the second adds necessary filtering details. No superfluous content.

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?

The description explains the tool's purpose and some behavioral traits, but lacks detail on parameter semantics and invocation behavior. With no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description should provide more complete guidance for an agent to correctly use the tool.

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 compensate. It does not describe the 'query' or 'limit' parameters, leaving their meaning and usage ambiguous. The description focuses on the tool's function rather than the parameters, which is a significant gap.

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 opens Google Maps for 'safe, manual-assisted visual inspiration review,' specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like open_instagram_visual_search by focusing on Google Maps and manual review.

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 implies the tool is for manual-assisted review, providing context for when to use it. It mentions filtering of map tile URLs and the inability to download preview URLs, which are behavioral hints. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool compared to alternatives like search_google_images.

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