maps_directions

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

The description mentions opening Maps with directions, which implies launching an app and a UI action, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., app focus, potential errors, or permissions). Annotations only have readOnlyHint=false, which is not contradicted, but the description adds little beyond that.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It could benefit from a bit more structure (e.g., separated notes), but it is appropriately concise.

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 simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is minimal but lacks details like supported destination formats, platform availability, or behavior when Maps is not installed. More context would help the agent use it effectively.

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 only parameter 'destination' has 0% schema description coverage. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the parameter name, such as expected format (e.g., address, coordinates) or examples.

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 action: opening Maps with directions to a destination. It uses a specific verb-resource combination ('Open Maps with directions') that distinguishes it from related sibling tools like open_app or search_google.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, open_url could also open Maps directions via URL, but no comparison or exclusion criteria are given.

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