Local-Logic location scores near a lat/lng

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, and idempotent. The description adds value by explaining the output format (value/text pairs) and error handling (returns error field with HTTP details on rejection), which goes beyond the 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?

Two sentences are concise and front-loaded. First sentence defines the tool's function and lists outputs; second covers output format and error handling. No 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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the output format and error case well. However, it omits details on coordinate system expected for lat/lng and does not explain the optional 'language' parameter. Minor gaps.

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 parameter descriptions. The description implies lat/lng form a coordinate but does not explain the 'language' parameter. It adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the lack of param documentation.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves 'Local-Logic location scores' for a coordinate and enumerates the types of scores (pedestrian, car, etc.). The verb 'get' is specific to a resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like onehome_get_schools, though the resource is distinct.

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. Does not mention prerequisites, coordinate system restrictions, or cases where another tool would be more appropriate.

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