find_parking_facilities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that results can be filtered by parking type and include capacity information where available, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention permissions, rate limits, or pagination behavior.

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 front-loaded with a clear first sentence and structured with Args/Returns sections. It is slightly verbose: the second sentence largely restates the first, and the 'Useful for...' sentence is filler rather than actionable guidance.

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 four parameters, two required, and the presence of an output schema, the description provides adequate coverage of inputs and even describes return fields. The main gap is the absence of usage guidance relative to sibling tools, but the core information needed to invoke the tool correctly is present.

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%, so the description must fully document parameters. It does so clearly: latitude and longitude with decimal-degree units, radius with meter units and a 1000m default, and parking_type as an optional filter with concrete examples like 'surface' and 'underground'.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Locate parking facilities near a specific location.' This clearly distinguishes it from generic siblings like find_nearby_places or find_ev_charging_stations by resource, but it does not explicitly name or contrast against any sibling tool.

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 gives implied usage through 'Useful for trip planning, city navigation, and evaluating parking availability in urban areas,' but offers no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternative tools like find_nearby_places or explore_area.

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