dv_locate

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

The annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world. The description adds a useful caveat that location accuracy is source-dependent, which goes beyond the annotations, though it does not discuss failure modes or endpoint behavior in detail.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted language. It efficiently states the operation and one important behavioral caveat.

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 two-parameter lookup with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers purpose and a reliability caveat. However, it does not compensate for the missing parameter descriptions or provide usage guidance relative to sibling tools.

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 compensate. It only says 'a point' and does not explain that the parameters are latitude and longitude, their expected format, coordinate order, or the numeric bounds already shown in the schema.

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: resolve a point to its city/district. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar siblings such as dv_geocode or dv_nearby.

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?

It implies the tool is for looking up a point's city/district, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling tool is referenced.

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