vision_locate

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: coordinates are model-estimated, must be validated before destructive actions, and the tool is not deterministic. This is substantial transparency especially given no annotations are present.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that efficiently cover purpose, behavior, and usage context. It is well-structured with no superfluous content.

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 no output schema, it does not need to explain returns. It provides sufficient context about when to use (agent grounding), what to expect (estimated coordinates), and constraints (validation needed, non-deterministic).

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 has three parameters (image, target, detail) with no descriptions, and the tool description does not explain any of them. It provides zero parameter semantics, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of coverage.

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's purpose: 'semantic localization of a visible target.' It uses a specific verb (localization) and resource (visible target), and distinguishes itself by noting it is not a deterministic object detector.

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?

It implies usage for agent grounding and cautions against relying on it for deterministic detection, but does not explicitly state when to use it over sibling tools or when to avoid it beyond the 'not deterministic' hint.

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