find_nearby

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and gives examples, but does not disclose sorting, search radius behavior, limit handling, or potential side effects. The description adds minimal context beyond the name.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately concise with no redundant wording.

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 having an output schema, the description is too brief to fully support usage. It doesn't explain key parameters (radius in meters, limit, categories), lacks usage context, and provides no behavioral details. A more complete description would mention the default radius, sorting, or that lat/lon are required.

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 property descriptions are completely absent (0% coverage). The description compensates only partially: examples like 'cafes, pharmacies, parks' hint at the 'category' parameter, but lat, lon, limit, and radius_m are left unexplained. No units, defaults, or behavior are described.

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 function: 'Find nearby points of interest' with concrete examples (cafes, pharmacies, parks). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like geocode or describe_area, which have different purposes.

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 vs. alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or specific use cases beyond the generic 'nearby points of interest'. There is no reference to sibling tools or when not to use it.

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