Show map

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds important context beyond that: the user sees the map while the agent does not, and the map auto-fits layers and markers without center/zoom. It also notes the client requirement, which is useful operational context. No contradiction with annotations.

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 four concise sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by the critical user-versus-agent caveat, the alternative tool, auto-fit behavior, and the client requirement.

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 display-only tool with zero required parameters, the description covers the essential operational details: what the user sees, what the agent cannot see, the alternative for self-inspection, auto-fit behavior, and client compatibility. The schema handles the parameter specifics, so nothing critical is missing.

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 low at 29%, so the description partially compensates by clarifying the interaction between center/zoom and layer auto-fitting. It also confirms layers and markers are GeoJSON-based. However, it does not add meaning for pitch, bearing, or basemap behavior beyond what the schema already provides, so the compensation is incomplete.

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 verb and resource: showing an interactive MapLibre map with GeoJSON layers and markers on an OpenFreeMap basemap. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling render_style by clarifying that the map is for the user, not for the agent.

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 tells the agent when to use this tool versus an alternative: 'to look at a map yourself, use render_style.' It also adds a practical prerequisite, 'Needs a client that supports MCP Apps,' and explains the auto-fit behavior when center and zoom are omitted.

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