get_map_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions output format (GeoJSON) and features, but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, authorization needs, or data volume implications. Partially transparent.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the primary purpose and immediately adds differentiating features.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description covers the basics but lacks details on the GeoJSON structure, pagination, or how clustering relates to zoom. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent to use without additional context.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes all 6 parameters. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what is in the schema; it merely echoes the features of clustering and bounding box. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves geolocated messages in GeoJSON format, and mentions key features like server-side clustering and bounding box filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_map_clusters or get_map_events.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., get_map_clusters, get_map_events, get_map_heatmap). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or alternatives.

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