find_nearest

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

With no annotations, the description discloses behavior: returns features sorted by distance (meters and miles), measured to feature boundary, and includes reverse lookup (containing feature with distance=0). No side effects or auth needs mentioned, but adequate for a read-only tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return format (features sorted by distance, in meters and miles). Also mentions reverse lookup behavior. Almost complete; could mention return structure but sufficient for a simple 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 coverage 100%, and the description adds context: explains that dataset UUID comes from list_datasets, and mentions max values for n (20) and radius (500000) which are already in schema. Provides meaning beyond 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?

Clearly states the tool finds nearest features (counties, districts, ZIP codes) to a coordinate, with a specific verb 'find' and resource 'nearest features'. Distinguishes from siblings by mentioning proximity queries and reverse lookup.

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?

Explicitly says use for proximity queries, finding what's nearby, ranking by distance, and reverse lookup. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to sibling tools like calculate_distance, but the description provides good context.

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