spansh_find_nearby_stations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Slimmed' is a useful hint that the payload is trimmed relative to a full station query, but there is nothing about result ordering, distance semantics, rate limits, or auth requirements for a Spansh-backed call.

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?

A single compact sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably too terse, but every word does work and there is no redundancy.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be re-explained, but with no annotations, 0% parameter documentation, and four parameters, the description is too thin to make the tool safely callable without trial and error.

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% – x/y/z and max_results have only bare titles. The description's 'galactic coords' loosely maps to x/y/z, but max_results is never explained and no units, ranges, or defaults are given beyond the schema's default of 10.

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?

States the resource (stations), an implicit verb (find nearest), and the source (Spansh) along with a scope qualifier ('slimmed for shopping lists'). An agent can tell it returns station data, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with inara_search_nearest or spansh_query_systems, which is the main thing separating a 4 from a 5.

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 phrase 'for shopping lists' hints at a use case but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when NOT to use it, and no named alternative despite several overlapping siblings (inara_search_nearest, spansh_query_systems).

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