search_nearby

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

Describes return format (dictionary with center point, radius, and place list) and parameter constraints (radius max 50000, max_results limit). No annotations exist, so disclosure is adequate for a read-only search; no side effects or auth requirements mentioned.

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?

Well-structured: brief intro sentence, usage guidance, labeled Args list, Returns, and Example. Every element earns its place; no fluff.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, all parameters (with details), return format, and an example. No obvious gaps for this tool's complexity.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by detailing each parameter: units for radius, example values for latitude/longitude, optional place_type with examples, and default values. Adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Explicitly states 'Search for places near specific coordinates' and gives a concrete example ('find restaurants near me'). It differentiates from siblings like 'search_places' (text-based) and 'geocode' (address to coordinates) by emphasizing GPS coordinate input.

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?

Clearly advises when to use: 'Use this when you have GPS coordinates and want to find places nearby.' Provides common query type. Lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but context implies it's for coordinate-based searches.

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