Find nearby restaurants by latitude and longitude, with paging, compact results, and vendor type filters for SnappFood ordering and discovery.
Nearby restaurants
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | No | ||
| long | No | ||
| page | No | ||
| token | No | ||
| compact | No | ||
| supertype | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it provides none. It does not say whether results are paginated, whether a token is required for authentication, what format is returned, or how results are ordered.
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 only two words, but that is under-specification rather than conciseness. Nothing is front-loaded because there is no meaningful information to front-load.
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?
For a 6-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema coverage, the description is entirely inadequate. An agent cannot determine required inputs, pagination, or authentication from this text.
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?
There are 6 parameters with 0% schema description coverage and no enums or nested objects, so the description must explain them. The description mentions nothing about lat/long, page, token, compact, or supertype, leaving every parameter undocumented.
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 'Nearby restaurants' restates the tool name without a specific verb and is ambiguous between 'list nearby restaurants' and 'search nearby restaurants'. Sibling tools such as food_place, food_area, and food_vendor all deal with venues, so the short phrase does nothing to distinguish this tool from its neighbors.
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 indication is given of when this tool should be used versus food_area, food_place, or food_vendor. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or the situation that selects this tool over the many other food_* siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.