suggest_locations

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

The description mentions fuzzy search and partial queries but doesn't specify behavior like case sensitivity, result limits, or error handling. With no annotations, more detail would be beneficial, but the basic behavior is conveyed.

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 extremely concise with two sentences: one for purpose and one for parameter details. No filler words, effectively front-loaded.

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 tool has only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description is mostly complete. It could mention that results are suggestions or that it's for autocomplete, but it's sufficient for a simple search tool.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the query is a partial location name and providing examples, compensating for the lack of schema 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 clearly states the tool does fuzzy-search of Daft.ie location names from a partial query. It is distinct from sibling tools (get_facilities, get_property_types, etc.) which serve different purposes.

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 gives examples of valid queries and implies this tool is for location autocomplete. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context with siblings makes it clear.

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