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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the output subject matter—population by age bracket and gender—which is transparent for a simple read-only lookup. However, it does not disclose details like whether values are counts or percentages, the census/source year, or the exact age brackets, though some of this may be covered by the output schema.

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 a single short sentence that states the core content directly with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simple behavior and does not repeat schema information unnecessarily.

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?

Given the tool is a simple one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient for invocation. However, it lacks contextual cues about how this relates to the many sibling demographics tools, and without annotations it leaves some behavioral and selection details to inference.

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 must compensate for undocumented parameters. It does not mention suburb_name at all beyond what the schema already provides, and it adds no guidance on format, casing, or example values. The single parameter is self-explanatory from its name, but the description itself contributes nothing to parameter understanding.

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 identifies the resource and data content: population grouped by age bracket and gender. It lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'gets', and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling demographics tools, but the age-and-gender combination is reasonably specific.

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 description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as suburbs_demographics_all, suburbs_demographics_income, or suburbs_demographics_cohorts. There is no mention of filtering, prerequisites, or which sibling tools are more appropriate for related data needs.

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