find_nearest_dock_spaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, whether it returns multiple docks or just the nearest, what happens if no dock has the required spaces, or if results are sorted by distance. The description leaves key behavioral aspects open to interpretation.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. The parameter list is structured and avoids fluff, though it partly duplicates the schema, it earns its place by compensating for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 3-parameter finder with an output schema, the description is mostly complete but lacks usage guidance and behavioral edge cases. The presence of an output schema partially satisfies return value disclosure, but the absence of annotations leaves gaps in understanding tool behavior.

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?

With schema coverage at 0%, the description must explain parameters. It adds minimal value by restating latitude/longitude as 'search location' and specifying count as 'number of spaces needed (default 1)'. The count explanation adds meaning, but latitude/longitude descriptions are largely tautological.

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 what the tool does: 'Find the nearest dock with at least N available return spaces.' This is a specific verb+resource+constraint and distinguishes from the sibling tool find_nearest_bike.

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 implies usage for finding docks with return space availability but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over find_nearest_bike or provide any exclusions. No alternatives or when-not guidance is given.

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