get_samples_within_lat_lon_bounding_box

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic function and does not mention edge cases (invalid coordinates), boundary handling, performance, pagination, or response format. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or limitations.

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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the key action and context, achieving maximum efficiency.

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 simplicity (4 params, no output schema), the description is still incomplete. It does not explain return format, error handling, or any constraints on coordinate values (e.g., valid ranges for latitude/longitude). An agent cannot rely on this alone to invoke the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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% (no parameter descriptions in schema), and the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names. It does not explain what each coordinate represents (e.g., lower_lat is southern boundary, upper_lat is northern), nor does it clarify units or constraints. This leaves the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

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 finds biosamples within a geographic bounding box, specifying the verb 'find', resource 'biosamples', and scope 'within a specific geographic bounding box defined by latitude and longitude coordinates'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_samples_in_elevation_range.

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 only says 'Use this tool to find biosamples' but provides no guidance on when to use it vs alternatives (e.g., get_samples_by_annotation, get_samples_in_elevation_range). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, so it lacks context for decision-making.

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