spatial_query

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) are consistent. The description adds context about cached data dependency and parameter constraints (e.g., latitude range, radius positive). It does not disclose performance or error behavior, but with annotations covering safety, the description provides adequate behavioral context.

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 clean docstring with sections for each parameter. It is efficient without fluff, but could be slightly more concise by removing redundant mentions like 'for within_radius' after the list.

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 7 parameters (2 required) and an output schema existing, the description covers all parameters with constraints and prerequisites. It explains the caching requirement and operation mapping, making it fairly complete for a complex geospatial 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 0%, but the description lists each parameter with constraints (e.g., latitude -90 to 90, radius_km > 0) and explains the operation types. This compensates for the schema gap, though it could clarify return format or limit behavior.

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 starts with 'Run spatial queries against cached geospatial data,' which clearly states the verb and resource. It lists specific operations (contains_point, within_bbox, within_radius), distinguishing it from siblings like 'query_cached' or 'sql_query'.

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 prerequisites (resource must be cached via load_geodata) and explains when to use each operation. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool compared to alternatives like 'query_cached'.

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