Ground Location Tool

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses that it returns place names, nearby POIs, travel-time reachability, and uses live Mapbox data with citations. This adds valuable context about what the tool does and its side-effect-free nature.

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 three sentences that efficiently convey purpose, usage guidance, and output. It is front-loaded with the core functionality and contains no redundant information.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 params, output schema), the description covers use case, when to use, what to pass, and what to expect. The output schema exists, so return values are not needed. It is fully complete for an AI agent to use correctly.

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?

Despite 100% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining that the query parameter is for place categories and that omitting it returns general context. It also clarifies that limit, profile, and contours_minutes are related to isochrone calculations.

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 explicitly states the tool answers questions about nearby places, neighborhoods, and walking/driving distance. It differentiates itself from siblings by instructing not to call reverse_geocode_tool and to use this as the first and only tool for such queries.

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 tells when to use (given coordinates and asked about nearby places) and when not to use (do not also call reverse_geocode_tool or search the web). It also provides guidance on passing categories via the query parameter.

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