load_area

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose caching behavior and an ordering dependency. However, it does not explain the force_refresh parameter or the behavior when both place and bbox are provided, leaving important behavior undocumented.

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 two sentences, with the core action in the first and usage guidance in the second. No filler or repetition.

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 covers the essential purpose and prerequisite relationship, and the output schema exists to describe returns. Yet with 6 optional parameters and no annotations, it leaves out force_refresh semantics and conflict resolution, so it is not fully complete.

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?

The description maps 'place' to a place name and indicates the four coordinate parameters form a bounding box, supplementing the bare schema. It does not, however, describe force_refresh or the exact coordinate format/inclusion rules, and schema coverage is 0%.

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 loads and caches an OSM walk+transit graph, using a specific verb ('load') and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting it is a prerequisite for plan_route, describe_area, and snap_to_network.

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?

It explicitly advises preferring a place query over a bbox, and states it must be called before three sibling tools. This gives an agent clear conditions for when to invoke it, though it does not discuss when not to use it or alternatives beyond the prerequisite list.

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