google_maps_directions

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

No annotations are provided. The description mentions it returns 'route info and a map screenshot' but lacks details on rate limits, authentication, or data format. It covers basic behavior but not comprehensively.

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?

Description is brief and well-structured: intro sentence, example prompts, and arg definitions. Every sentence is useful, no redundancy.

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 simple 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it explains inputs, examples, and basic output. It lacks return value specifics but that's acceptable given complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning: origin/destination as 'address, city, or place name', mode with list of options ('driving', 'walking', 'transit', 'cycling') and default 'driving'. This compensates for the bare 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 explicitly states the tool gets driving/walking/transit/cycling directions between locations, with sample prompts that cover various modes. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like google_maps which likely handle place searches.

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?

Sample prompts provide clear usage context (e.g., 'Get directions from Berlin to Munich'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, though siblings like google_maps imply distinction.

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