geo_bbox

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses the tool's behavior: it computes a bounding box from center point and radius. It is a pure computation with no side effects, so additional disclosure beyond what is stated is minimal. However, could specify the geometric model (e.g., spherical approximation) for completeness.

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 concise sentences: first defines the operation and output, second suggests use cases. No redundancy or unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple computational tool with no output schema, the description fully communicates the purpose, inputs, and outputs. It is self-contained and sufficient for an agent to use 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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds value by explicitly defining the output format (south, west, north, east), which is not in the schema. This clarifies how the radius maps to the bounding box edges.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Compute' and the resource 'bounding box', with explicit output components (south, west, north, east). Distinguishes from sibling tools like geo_distance and geo_elevation which serve different spatial 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?

Provides a usage context ('spatial queries and map viewports') but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative sibling tools. Implicit guidance exists but is not comprehensive.

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