Find RONA stores near a location

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool returns sorted store data and lists all fields, which is sufficient for a read-only query tool. It does not mention side effects, auth, or rate limits, but those are not critical for a simple store-finder.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence states the purpose and supported inputs; the second lists the output fields. No unnecessary information.

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?

The description sufficiently explains the tool's behavior and output given the context (no output schema). It covers the key aspects, though it could mention the limit parameter's effect or error handling. Overall, it's complete for a simple lookup 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?

All 5 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying that latitude/longitude are an alternative to postalCode and that lang defaults to 'en', which goes beyond the schema.

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 finds RONA stores nearest to a Canadian postal code or lat/lng, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on products, search, or availability.

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 implies usage for finding stores by location, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The sibling names provide context, but the description could be improved with direct guidance.

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