places_nearby

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors (e.g., read-only, rate limits, output format). It only advertises features without mentioning any constraints or return characteristics, leaving critical gaps for an agent.

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 efficiently convey purpose and typical use cases. No extraneous text; each sentence earns its place. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 omits what the tool returns (e.g., place details, ratings). Without an output schema, this is a significant gap. For a common task like nearby search, more context on results and limitations is needed.

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?

All parameters have full schema descriptions, so the description adds limited value. It provides context ('restaurants, shops...') but doesn't specify parameter formats or interdependencies beyond what's already in the schema.

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 discovers places within a radius, with examples like restaurants and shops. However, it does not differentiate it from similar sibling tools like 'nearby_find' or 'places_search_text', missing an opportunity to clarify unique scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions it's 'perfect for finding...' but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions, which is problematic given multiple related sibling tools.

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