localize

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the state-mutation lifecycle (store the updated SCR from the second content block, discard the old one) and the return semantics (delta only: + entered, - left, ~ moved/updated). It does not cover error behavior or what happens if the SCR is stale, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and ending with the critical state-maintenance instruction. Every clause carries operational value with no filler.

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?

It compensates for the missing output schema by explaining the delta return format and the two-content-block structure, and covers the important stateful behavior. Minor gap: the optional budget/layers/radiusM parameters are not mentioned, though the schema documents them fully.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents lat/lon, scr, budget, layers, and radiusM. The description adds a little beyond the schema by emphasizing the SCR rotation rule, but adds no syntax or format detail for the geographic or budget parameters; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Move within a map session') and distinguishes it from get_maplet by describing it as motion inside an existing session. An agent can tell it apart from the session-creating sibling without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly frames it as operating on a session 'you already hold' and names where the SCR comes from (get_maplet with returnScr, or the last localize), which implies the correct sequencing. It stops short of explicitly saying not to use this for an initial fetch or how it differs from route, but the prerequisite is clear.

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