ta_search_nearby

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds value by specifying the result limit (up to 10) and the key field provided (location_id), which aids in agent planning.

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 consists of two sentences: first states purpose and key parameter, second states output detail and connection to other tools. No redundancy, well-structured, and appropriately sized.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and output, but given the absence of an output schema and the presence of 7 parameters, it could provide more completeness, such as clarifying ordering, error cases, or that results are sorted by relevance. The openWorldHint from annotations suggests dynamic results, but the description does not address this.

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 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool-level description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. However, it clarifies the purpose of the returned location_id in the context of other tools.

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 clearly states the verb 'find' and resource 'TripAdvisor locations' with a specific criterion 'near a latitude/longitude'. It also hints at use case by mentioning location_id for detail tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'ta_search_locations', which likely offers text-based search.

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 mentions that results provide location_id for detail tools, suggesting a usage pattern, but it offers no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools indicate there are other search methods, but no comparative context is given.

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