events_near

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

Discloses key behavioral traits: returns only Point geometry events from Vejdirektoratet, excludes events without coordinates, and sorts by distance. However, it does not cover error conditions, rate limits, or any side effects. No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden.

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?

Description is three sentences plus an example, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no superfluous text.

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?

Adequately covers purpose and constraints given the simple input schema, but lacks details on output format and error handling. With no output schema, the description could be more 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% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, only providing an overall example that uses the parameters.

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?

Describes specifically finding current traffic events by geographic radius, listing event types, and noting that only events with Point geometry are returned. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools 'roadworks' and 'traffic_events' by focusing on location-based filtering.

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?

States it is useful for checking conditions near a destination or along a route, and provides a concrete example. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with sibling tools beyond the implicit filtering.

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