reverse_geocode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It specifies units (decimal degrees) and return type (display-name string), but does not disclose limitations, error handling, or coordinate bounds. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Two sentences and an example convey all necessary information without wasted words. The structure is front-loaded with the purpose, followed by units and an illustrative example.

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 the low complexity, presence of an output schema (not shown), and sibling tools, the description fully covers what the agent needs: it explains input meaning, output type, and provides an example. No gaps.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It provides units and a concrete example, which substantially clarifies the parameters' expected values. This 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 it reverse geocodes a coordinate to an address, using straightforward verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'geocode' (forward geocoding) by its name and action.

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 the tool is used when converting lat/lon to a human-readable address, but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or exclusions. Given the sibling context, it's clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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