tool_find_places

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions using OpenStreetMap and no API key, but does not disclose rate limits, data accuracy, side effects, or return format. The description is insufficient for understanding behavioral traits.

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 concise with two well-structured paragraphs. The first paragraph states the purpose and key features, and the second lists parameters. Every sentence 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?

The description explains all parameters and tool source, but lacks details about the return format (e.g., what fields are returned for each place). Given the tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, this omission reduces completeness.

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 0%, but the description provides an 'Args:' section that explains each parameter, including allowed values for category, ranges for radius_km, defaults, and the role of city. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 finds places like viewpoints, beaches, hiking trails, and coworking spaces using OpenStreetMap. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tool_verify_place and tool_search_activities by focusing on category-based location search.

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 by listing categories and mentioning no API key required, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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