datasets_github_users_nearby

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions sorting by distance and the dataset ID, but lacks disclosure on pagination behavior, authentication needs, rate limits, data freshness, or side effects of optional filters. The enumeration of influence_tier is merely a repetition of schema content.

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, no unnecessary words. The purpose is front-loaded. However, the second sentence is slightly cryptic ('in dataset id enum value') and could be clearer. Overall appropriate length for the tool's complexity.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return format. It does not mention what fields are returned, how results are paginated, or what 'enriched' means. With 8 parameters and no side-effect details, the description is incomplete for guiding the agent on proper usage and expectations.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond schema: it confirms sorting by distance and ties to a specific dataset. However, it does not explain optional parameters like reachable, min_followers, or clarify how 'enriched' applies. The influence_tier enum repetition is redundant.

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 it searches GitHub users near a coordinate, sorted by distance. The verb 'search' and resource 'enriched GitHub users' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like datasets_github_users_search or datasets_github_users_facets, though the context implies a geo-search specialization.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., datasets_github_users_search for non-geo searches, datasets_github_users_facets for aggregated data). The description does not mention prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions.

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