map_distance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only explains parameter semantics but does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., distance units, estimated time format), error handling, or any side effects. The description is essentially a restatement of the schema.

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 two short sentences with no unnecessary words. It immediately states the purpose and then explains key parameters, making it easy to scan.

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 fails to specify the output format (e.g., distance in km, time in minutes) or any constraints on coordinates (e.g., valid range). Without output schema, this is a significant gap for an agent using the tool effectively.

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%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema—it reiterates the meaning of mode and coordinate format already present in the parameter descriptions. It does not provide additional context such as example values or constraints.

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 calculates distance and estimated time between two points, with specific modes (driving/walking) and coordinate format. It differentiates from sibling tools like map_direction by focusing on distance/time calculation rather than routing.

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 vs alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or provide any context for comparison with sibling tools like map_direction or map_search_poi.

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