locate

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

The description discloses that it returns matched:false when no routable road is near, stating 'never a guess.' It lists returned fields and optional elevation, but does not cover authentication or rate limits. Since annotations are absent, the description carries the burden and does well.

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 well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and lists outputs efficiently. No redundant words; every clause adds value.

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?

While the description specifies return fields and failure behavior, it fails to explain how the input coordinate is provided, given an empty input schema. This omission reduces completeness for an agent deciding how to invoke the tool.

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 declares 0 parameters, but the description mentions an 'include_elevation' optional parameter. This contradicts the schema and could confuse an AI agent. With 100% schema coverage vacuously, the description adds misleading information rather than clarifying.

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 snaps a coordinate to the road network, returning specific road context fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings like reverse_geocode and directions by focusing on road snapping and road attributes.

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 road snapping but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions are mentioned, leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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