Search Location

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the external backend (OpenStreetMap Nominatim), signaling a network dependency and third-party rate limits, but says nothing about behavior on no-match, ambiguity, or whether the call is read-only.

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?

One compact sentence with the operation front-loaded and the consumer plus backend tucked into a trailing clause. Every element earns its place; no 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is a simple single-parameter lookup. The description covers what it does and its backend; only failure/no-match behavior is left unstated, which is a minor gap for a geocoder.

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 0% and the single parameter 'q' is undocumented in the schema. The description implies q is a place name ('nombre de lugar'), which is meaningful, but it gives no format, language, or disambiguation guidance for the query string.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it converts a place name into coordinates. It also ties the output to the downstream consumer (/natal), which distinguishes it from the horoscope/transit siblings. It never literally uses a 'search' verb despite the tool name, leaving a small mismatch with the identifier.

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 purpose clause implies the tool is a prerequisite for /natal, so the agent can infer when to call it, but there is no explicit when/when-not statement and no mention of alternatives or that it is a network-backed external lookup.

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