geocode

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the input format, return structure (formatted_address, latitude, longitude, place_id), and provides an example. It does not mention error handling, rate limits, or accuracy, but for a simple geocoding tool the information is sufficient.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, followed by usage guidance, then structured Args/Returns/Example. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy. It is concise yet complete.

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 tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers input semantics, return structure, and example usage. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so description must compensate. It explains the address parameter can be 'Address, place name, landmark, or location description' and gives concrete examples like 'Ferry Building San Francisco'. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type string.

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 'Convert an address or place description to GPS coordinates' which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_directions, reverse_geocode, and search_nearby that have different purposes.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when a user describes their location... and you need coordinates for search_nearby.' This provides clear context for when to use this tool over alternatives, directly naming a sibling tool as a downstream use case.

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