Loading ToolBench
Execute deterministic, zero-dependency Geospatial Intelligence & Interactive Map operations verified by GenPark AI. Provides multi-stop vehicle route optimization using Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) algorithms.
Single tool 'execute_skill_action' has critical definition gaps. Description is present (97 chars) but vague, does not explain WHAT geospatial operations are supported, WHEN to use it, or what the output structure is. Input schema exists but parameter 'query_payload' is a bare string with minimal guidance (no format, no examples, no constraints). No output schema documented. Tool name uses 'execute' (generic verb) rather than domain-specific action (e.g., 'optimize_route', 'calculate_distance'). No error handling guidance. No parameter validation rules. Fails to meet baseline: 100% of A+ tools have documented return types; 100% of A+ tool params have descriptions with format/constraint guidance.
Execute deterministic, zero-dependency Geospatial Intelligence & Interactive Map operations verified by GenPark AI.
Tool name 'execute_skill_action' is generic and does not convey domain intent. Should be verb_noun pattern reflecting actual capability (e.g., 'optimize_delivery_route', 'calculate_route_distance'). Generic names like 'execute' and 'action' force LLMs to guess the tool's purpose.
Description lacks specificity. Does not state WHAT geospatial operations are supported (route optimization? distance calculation? waypoint validation?), WHEN to use this tool vs. alternatives, or what output structure to expect. Current description (97 chars) is too vague for LLM tool selection.
Input parameter 'query_payload' is a bare string with no format specification, no enum constraints, no length limits, and no examples of valid payloads. LLMs cannot infer what structure or content is expected. Violates baseline: 100% of A+ tools have parameter descriptions with format/constraint guidance.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 30 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
No output schema documented. Tool returns hardcoded JSON with 'status' and 'message' fields, but LLMs have no way to know what fields to expect or how to extract results. Violates baseline: 100% of A+ tools have documented return types.
No error handling guidance. Tool always returns 'SUCCESS' status regardless of input validity. LLMs cannot distinguish between valid execution and silent failures. No recovery hints provided.