bos_store_nearby

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention output format, pagination, sorting, distance units for radius, error handling for invalid coordinates, or limits (e.g., max radius). The description is too minimal.

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 extremely concise (4 words) and front-loads the core purpose. However, it may be too brief, sacrificing necessary detail. It earns a 4 for efficiency but not a 5 due to under-specification.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not address return data (e.g., store names, distances), error conditions, or how 'nearby' is defined (e.g., radius default). The agent lacks key information for correct invocation.

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% with no descriptions for parameters. The description adds no meaning beyond parameter names. For 'radius', units (e.g., kilometers) and whether it is optional or defaulted are not clarified. Latitude/longitude are self-explanatory but still lack precision hints (e.g., WGS84).

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 'Find nearby stores by location' clearly states the action (find) and resource (nearby stores) with a qualifier (by location). While it distinguishes from generic 'list' tools by implying spatial filtering, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like 'bos_store_list' or 'bos_store_show'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, 'bos_store_list' might list all stores without filtering by location. No context is provided for when to prefer this tool or what prerequisites exist (e.g., geocoding).

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