search_by_location

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the high-level purpose and does not explain result format, pagination, default behavior, or whether certain parameters (e.g., city or facilityName) are expected for a valid search.

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, well-formed sentence with no redundant words. The core action and target are front-loaded, making it highly scannable and concise.

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 annotations, and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It fails to explain parameter relationships (e.g., distance is radius for city), default page size, or other behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema covers all 6 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, such as how 'distance' interacts with 'city' or which parameters are commonly combined.

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 'Find clinical trials by geographic location' clearly identifies the action (find), the resource (clinical trials), and the filter dimension (geographic location). This differentiates it from sibling tools like search_by_condition or search_by_sponsor, which focus on other criteria.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling search tools. It does not mention preferred scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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