list_maps_places

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It implies a read-only listing but never explicitly states safety, side effects, or what happens if output_dir is invalid. This gap is significant for a tool with no annotation guidance.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List previously fetched places') and adds supplemental details (counts, metadata). Every word contributes to understanding.

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?

With a defined output schema, return values need not be described, but the description omits critical operational context such as whether output_dir is required, its default behavior, or any expected directory structure. The tool is simple, but the lack of parameter clarity and usage guidance reduces completeness to a marginal level.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only hints at 'output root' without explicitly tying it to the output_dir parameter. It does not explain the format, defaults, or constraints of output_dir, leaving the agent to guess its meaning.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'previously fetched places', and specifies it includes photo/video counts and metadata. It distinguishes itself from siblings like fetch_maps_place (which fetches new places) by emphasizing 'previously fetched'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_place_info or get_place_media. It does not mention exclusions or preconditions, leaving the agent to infer that it is for browsing accumulated results without explicit direction.

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