brave_local_search

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses automatic fallback to web search and lists returned information (names, ratings, hours). It lacks details on rate limits or authorization, but the key behavior is transparent.

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 a concise paragraph with bullet points. It front-loads the purpose, then gives usage context, return info, and a fallback note. No unnecessary words, well-organized.

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, but description explains return details (business names, addresses, ratings, etc.) and fallback behavior. It misses error handling or pagination, but for a local search tool with two simple params, it is sufficiently complete.

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% (both params described), baseline 3. The description adds meaning by specifying query examples ('pizza near Central Park') and default count behavior, plus clarifies what the return values include. This goes beyond 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 searches for local businesses and places using Brave's Local Search API. It distinguishes from siblings like brave_web_search by specifying physical locations and business entities, and notes a fallback to web search.

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 explicitly says 'Best for queries related to physical locations' and 'Use this when the query implies "near me" or mentions specific locations,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is strong.

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