lookup_city_coordinates

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 states it searches cities and retrieves coordinates/timezone, which is adequate but does not disclose potential search behavior (e.g., partial match, case sensitivity) or any mutation side effects.

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 with clear flow: what it does, when to use, scope. Minimal but effective, though the last sentence could be integrated to reduce redundancy.

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 the simple single-parameter input and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and use case sufficiently. It could mention that the output includes coordinates for precise location, but overall adequate.

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 only one parameter, and the description adds the example 'Mumbai', 'Delhi', 'London' reinforcing the parameter's usage. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides clear description.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Look up'), resource ('latitude, longitude, and timezone for a city by name'), and scope ('80+ Indian and global cities'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_moon_sign or get_planet_details.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool 'before any birth chart calculation' when coordinates are unknown, providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or list alternatives among siblings.

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