closest_facility

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the requirement for Network Analyst and the underlying function, but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or what side effects occur.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences, no filler, and the primary purpose is front-loaded. Every word adds value.

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 complexity of a network analysis tool with 7 parameters and an output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the parameters, expected inputs, or behavior beyond a vague overview, leaving many gaps for the agent.

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?

The input schema has partial descriptions for some parameters (travel_mode, out_features, network_dataset), but the tool description itself does not explain any parameter. With a schema description coverage of 0% from the description, the baseline is 3 as the schema partially compensates.

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 'Nearest facility routes per incident', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like route_analysis, od_cost_matrix, and near_analysis by focusing on closest facility per incident.

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 implies usage by explaining what it does, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it give when-not-to-use scenarios.

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