Generate map links

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint: true, so the description does not need to reiterate that it is a safe read operation. The description adds the fact that it generates a URL to open in a browser, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention that the link requires network access or that geocoding is involved, which could affect behavior. With annotations covering safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 two sentences long with no wasted words. It front-loads the main purpose and then clearly states the two usage patterns. Every sentence adds value, making it highly efficient.

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 that there is no output schema, the description does not need to explain the return value (it is clear: a URL). The parameter combinations are well explained, and the tool's simplicity (generating links) is fully captured. The description would benefit from mentioning that the tool does not perform routing or geocoding in real-time, but this is a minor gap.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by clarifying the required parameter combinations ('place' vs 'from' and 'to') and implying that 'profile' and 'language' are optional. However, it does not explain the default behavior for 'profile' (default foot) or 'language' (default en) beyond what the schema provides, so the added value is limited.

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 'Generates openstreetmap.org links to open in a browser' with specific use cases: 'a marker link for a single place, or a directions link when from and to are given.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like geocode (which returns coordinates) or route (which computes paths), making the purpose very clear.

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 explicitly states 'Provide either

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