maps_around_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states the basic operation (search POIs with keywords, location, radius) but does not describe output format, error conditions, or behavior when no keywords are given.

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 very short—one sentence that front-loads the purpose. It wastes no words, though being in Chinese may reduce readability for English-based agents.

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 no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of POI names, addresses, coordinates). It does not, leaving the agent unaware of the output structure. The tool is fairly simple (3 params), but the description is incomplete.

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%, so the description adds meaning by explaining that 'location' is coordinates, 'radius' is the search range, and 'keywords' are search terms. However, it lacks specifics such as radius unit (likely meters) and location format (lat,lng), leaving ambiguity.

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 it searches for POIs based on keywords and location within a radius. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like maps_text_search (text-only) and maps_search_detail (retrieve specific POI details). The verb 'search' and resource 'POI' are explicit.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as maps_text_search or maps_search_detail. There is no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or when not to use it.

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