Find location

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: results are geographically biased toward near_lat/near_long and default to Tehran, which is a ranking quirk an agent must know. It doesn't discuss result count/pagination, but the output schema presumably handles returns.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose, ordering rule, and geobias caveat. The most decision-relevant instruction ('use first') is front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present and rich annotations, the description only needs to add routing and behavior context, which it does fully. An agent knows when to call it, what it returns conceptually, and the bias caveat.

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 baseline is 3, but the description contributes meaning the schema does not: the schema lists near_lat/near_long defaults as null while the description reveals the effective default bias is Tehran. That is genuine added semantics for the geobias parameters.

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 a precise transformation ('place name or address into latitude/longitude') with a clear verb and resource. It is implicitly differentiated from the inverse sibling reverse_geocode and from the food_*/market_* consumers that require its output.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('Use first when the user gives an address instead of coordinates') and explains the downstream dependency ('every food_* and market_* tool needs lat/long'). It also instructs to pass a city center for non-Tehran cities, covering the when-not default case.

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