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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false; the description adds real behavioral content about what comes back — an index per measure, an 80% interval, percentile and confidence — and the word 'Every' signals no pagination. It does not cover error behavior for an invalid place_id, which keeps it below 5.

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 compact sentences, with the resource and payload front-loaded and the usage hint second. No filler, though the opening clause is slightly dense and takes a second read.

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 read-only, closed-world, three-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the returned statistics adequately but leaves the agent without guidance on obtaining a valid place_id or on sort ordering — gaps that matter for correct invocation.

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 is only 33%: place_id and sort have no descriptions. The description partially compensates by stating the measure default (total_major), which the schema omits, but it says nothing about the sort enum values or what place_id must reference.

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?

Names a specific resource (census block groups inside a place) and the payload (index for one measure, 80% interval, percentile, confidence), which distinguishes it from siblings like place_profile and crime_index. It is a noun-phrase description of the return value rather than an explicit verb, but the intent is unambiguous.

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 sentence 'Use it to describe how crime varies across a city' gives a usage context, but no when-not conditions and no named alternatives (e.g., crime_index or nearby_incidents) to route the agent away when this tool is wrong.

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