zornade_geocode_reverse

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds return behavior (closest addresses, distance in meters) and a domain-specific data source (ANNCSU), but it does not disclose failure modes, no-result behavior, ordering guarantees beyond 'closest', or whether this is a read-only operation.

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?

Two short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded immediately after the tool name. Every phrase earns its place; there is no redundant or promotional language.

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?

For a low-complexity lookup with four well-documented parameters, the description covers the primary behavior and result shape (addresses with distance). Since there is no output schema, it would benefit from a bit more detail on return structure or empty-result behavior, but nothing critical is missing.

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 100%, and every parameter already has an explanatory description including bounds, defaults, and max values. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so it stays at the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 states a specific verb-resource pairing: 'find Italian addresses near WGS84 coordinates' and explicitly identifies the operation as reverse geocoding. It also names the return type (closest ANNCSU addresses with distance), which distinguishes it from the geocode_search sibling.

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 phrase 'Reverse geocoding' and the coordinate input clearly establish when to use this tool: when you have WGS84 coordinates and need addresses. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can route the call correctly.

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