get_amenities

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states output format (GeoJSON) and input. It lacks information on data source, rate limits, authentication, empty results handling, or performance implications.

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 concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose and output format. No unnecessary words, and front-loaded with the core action.

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 7 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is brief but covers the basic input and output. However, it lacks completeness regarding error conditions, limit behavior, or response structure, which is important for a spatial query tool.

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 100% for all 7 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra context (examples of amenity types) beyond what is in the schema, but does not improve understanding of parameter values or constraints.

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 amenities (facilities/equipment) in a rectangular area as GeoJSON, listing examples like restaurants, hospitals, schools. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., get_buildings, get_roads) by focusing on POI amenities rather than other spatial features.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_buildings, get_green_spaces). It does not specify exclusions or conditions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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