find_schools_nearby

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the default radius, optional education_levels filter, and the fields returned, but does not disclose sorting behavior, edge cases, or any potential side effects. It adds some context but is not exhaustive.

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 well-structured with an overview, Args, and Returns sections. It is slightly verbose but each part provides useful information. It front-loads the main purpose and uses bullet-like formatting for readability.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the parameter semantics and return format in enough detail for basic usage. However, it lacks edge-case information such as result sorting, handling of empty results, or radius inclusivity, making it just short of 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 input schema has no descriptions (0% schema description coverage). The description's Args section explains every parameter with units, defaults, and examples for education_levels, adding significant meaning beyond the schema's simple titles.

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 'locates educational institutions near a specific location, filtered by education level.' It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes itself from generic sibling tools like find_nearby_places and search_category by focusing on schools and education levels.

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 provides clear context for use, such as 'families evaluating neighborhoods or real estate purchases with education considerations,' but does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or recommend alternatives. It gives a use case but lacks exclusions.

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