locate

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains that the tool verifies existence and returns country information, and it includes a useful user-facing safety rule. However, it does not describe error behavior, ambiguous results, or what happens when the query matches multiple places.

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 sentences: the first states the core behavior, the second gives a concrete usage scenario. There is no filler, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with an output schema present, the description is sufficient for basic calling decisions. It would benefit from covering edge cases like ambiguous or nonexistent places, but given the small surface and clear sibling context, the definition is adequately 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 schema says only that 'query' is a string with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates by indicating that the parameter is a populated place name whose spelling the agent may be uncertain about, adding meaningful semantics to the otherwise empty schema.

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 states a specific action — 'checks that a populated place exists' and 'clarifies the country' — with a clear resource. It also distinguishes itself from weather siblings by focusing on location verification rather than weather output.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: when uncertain about the spelling of a place name, it is better to ask the user than to silently return weather for the wrong city. It clearly implies when this tool matters, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or 'when not to use.'

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