find_libraries_near_address

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key behavioral details: results are sorted by distance, temporarily-closed branches are excluded by default, and the include_closed flag allows including them. It stops short of describing error handling or exact return shape, but this is reasonable for a read-only lookup.

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 and well-structured: a single-sentence purpose followed by a clean Args list. Every sentence adds value, including ranges and defaults, with no redundant filler.

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?

Parameter coverage is excellent, and the purpose is clear. However, with no output schema, the description does not explain what fields each returned branch contains (e.g., name, address, distance, hours). It also does not provide guidance on when to use this vs. find_libraries_near_coordinates, which is a notable gap given the sibling tool.

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 itself provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), but the tool description fully compensates: each parameter is documented with type, range or default, and address includes a concrete example. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('public library branches'), and clearly states the geographic scope ('nearest to a US street address') and sorting behavior. This distinguishes it from siblings like find_libraries_near_coordinates and search_libraries.

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?

The description clearly indicates this tool is for US street address-based lookups, which establishes the appropriate context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is clear and unambiguous.

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