list_nearby_regions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does state 'retrieves' implying a read-only operation, and adds context about the default page. However, it doesn't disclose any side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits, leaving some uncertainty about behavior.

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 single, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No wasted words.

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 gives essential context (default page, nearby slugs) and the schema covers both parameters. However, without an output schema, it could mention the return structure more explicitly, but the phrase 'list of slugs' already indicates the output. Overall it's adequately 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?

Both parameters (limit, keyword) already have clear descriptions in the schema (max results, neighborhood name filter). The tool description adds no additional meaning about these parameters, so baseline 3 applies.

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 retrieves the list of nearby neighborhood slugs shown on the default page, using a specific verb (조회합니다) and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_listings or validate_region_slug.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of exclusions or prerequisites. The description only implies it is for the default page's nearby regions, but doesn't provide decision criteria.

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