Find pharmacies with operating hours

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that results include location, phone, and per-day operating hours (via Korean text) and that this is a read-only find operation, which is sufficient for an agent to understand side-effect-free behavior.

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 compact: one English sentence, a Korean equivalent, and a usage example. It is front-loaded with the action and avoids fluff; the Korean portions serve local users without bloating the definition.

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, the description compensates by naming the main returned attributes (location, phone, hours) and giving a concrete example. It doesn't mention edge cases like empty results or combined filters, but for a simple optional-parameter search tool this is adequate.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a natural-language summary of the district/name search and an example query, slightly enriching the schema by tying parameters to real user intents, though it does not add new 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 uses the specific verb 'Find', names the resource 'Seoul pharmacies', and specifies search criteria ('by district or name keyword') plus key output ('per-day operating hours'), clearly distinguishing it from generic sibling search_place.

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?

It provides an explicit use case with an example query ('What time does a Gangnam-gu pharmacy close?') and states the tool is for pharmacy-specific lookups. It does not explicitly name siblings as alternatives, so no full when-not-to-use list, but context is clear.

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