reverse_geocode

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

Discloses a key behavioral edge case: ocean/unmapped coordinates return 404 and never fabricate an address. This exceeds basic annotation coverage and sets accurate expectations.

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 concise sentences fully convey purpose and critical behavior without unnecessary detail.

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 is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's function and main limitation, though it does not specify output format or exact response shape. Given the simple input schema and clear purpose, this is acceptable.

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?

The schema already documents both parameters with ranges; the description adds the semantic purpose of these coordinates in the context of reverse geocoding, slightly enhancing understanding.

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 ('Convert') and resource ('latitude/longitude coordinates' to 'nearest street address and place name'), and differentiates from sibling 'geocode' by specifying reverse geocoding via OpenStreetMap.

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?

Clearly describes the tool's purpose and distinguishes from the forward 'geocode' sibling implicitly. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context and wording make the use case clear.

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