Find parking by name or road

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a behavioral claim that results come "with free spaces right now," but the schema's default want="any" returns every place and only want="space" filters out full/closed locations; this makes the description's availability statement misleading.

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 short, front-loaded, and uses compact examples that help clarify the keyword search. The only weakness is that the "with free spaces right now" clause is not just extra detail but potentially misleading.

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 rich schema coverage and annotations covering read-only/open-world behavior, the description is mostly sufficient for calling the tool. It omits sibling differentiation and overstates availability, but the required parameters and keyword-search purpose are clear.

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 city, keyword, want, limit, and vehicle. The description only adds examples for city and keyword and does not clarify want, limit, or vehicle semantics beyond the schema, so 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?

The description states a specific resource and filter: car parks and on-street parking matched by keyword in name, address, or road. The examples make the keyword-search intent clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate this from the sibling parking_nearby tool.

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?

Usage is implied by the required city and keyword parameters and the examples, so an agent can infer this is for name/road keyword lookups. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of parking_nearby or other nearby-search tools.

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