Ask a human to share their location

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses the human consent flow (Share/Decline prompt), that exactly one position is captured once and frozen at that moment, and the full outcome set. It also warns that any non-SHARED result means no location exists and must not be guessed, which is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then consent mechanics, then usage scope, then return values and the safety caveat. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description fully compensates by enumerating both the success payload (latitude, longitude, accuracy) and every failure state (DECLINED, NO ANSWER, EXPIRED). Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly or interpret the result is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents question, details, timeout_seconds and require_biometric with defaults. The description adds conceptual context about the prompt interaction but no parameter-specific syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: asking the human owner to share their current position, and explicitly frames it as a one-shot request rather than tracking. It doesn't name the sibling tools (ask_approval, request_photo, send_notification) to route the agent away, so differentiation is by implication rather than statement.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use with concrete examples (find the nearest branch, set a timezone, log a site visit) and an explicit when-not ('not to track them'). The condition that selects this tool is unambiguous.

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