高德坐标转地址

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent, and open world behavior. The description adds the critical requirement of an AMAP_API_KEY, which is not in annotations. This provides additional behavioral constraint beyond what annotations offer. No contradictions.

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 short, front-loaded sentences: first states purpose, second states prerequisite. No wasted words.

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?

Despite clear purpose and good schema, the description lacks any indication of the output format or structure. With no output schema present, the description should at least mention what kind of data is returned (e.g., province, city, district). This gap reduces completeness for an AI agent.

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% (all 3 parameters have descriptions). The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 converts coordinates to Chinese address and administrative division, using a specific verb '反查'. It distinguishes from sibling tool cn_amap_geocode (which does the reverse) by mentioning '反查', implying the opposite direction.

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 usage for geocoding coordinates to Chinese addresses and mentions a prerequisite (AMAP_API_KEY), but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus alternatives. The usage is clear from context but not elaborated.

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