maps_ip_location

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not detail what happens on invalid IPs, accuracy, rate limits, or whether it returns city-level or precise coordinates. The description is too terse to convey important behavioral traits.

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 sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no fluff. It is well front-loaded and every word is necessary.

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 simple geolocation tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not describe the return format (e.g., latitude/longitude or address), which would be helpful. Lacks completeness for fully informed use.

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 100% as the only parameter 'ip' has a description 'IP地址'. The description essentially repeats that the tool uses the IP input, adding no new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: given an IP address, it locates the IP's position. The verb '定位' (locate) and resource 'IP地址' (IP address) are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like maps_geo or maps_search which deal with addresses or places.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. For example, it does not clarify if it works for private IPs or requires specific input formats.

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