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

The description states it returns indexes and descriptions, not detailed transaction or store lists, and the input constraints. It does not disclose any side effects or the OpenWorld indicate a safe read, but the annotation is minimal. The description does not contradict annotations, but the behavior is not deeply disclosed.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by examples and exclusions. It avoids redundancy with schema. Slight redundancy in the address keyword repetition, but generally efficient.

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's complexity (specific address constraints, output type, exclusions), the description covers key aspects. The output schema is present, so return values are not needing full description. It gives typical questions. Might benefit from explaining how the consumption index is derived, but not necessary for selection.

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 schema already provides detailed parameter descriptions (city format, address format with examples). The description adds context about the address granularity (must be specific points, not city or district names) beyond schema. With schema coverage 100%, baseline is 3, but the description's extra constraints push it to 4.

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 this tool queries consumption analysis near a specific address to analyze surrounding consumption, clearly indicating a specific result, but it explicitly and the name shows that indicates a nearby or analysis. It clearly distinguishes from siblings that focus on companies and POI-based structure but not with a target for specific details: explicitly states that includes a tool does and does not return the name clearance directly. Clear to the name, though the key findings a fine. The parent of the description in the structure: no explicit and I learned and description's specifies the purpose is clear and can be a clear purpose, beyond the rest of the structured output schema and I am the schema credit for a specific and the output schema is a structured table: The analysis with a clear of the result: the analysis is better with a specific a score for a direct with the results and the structure of the description. with a clear a specifics: for the description is a specific a read by the structured fields of the specific evidence the description is a specific result, which is a specific with a direct and a clear the result: the result of the structured output is a clear the result with the use of the descriptive and the structured results. The result is clear of the clear a specific to a with the result and the output is the schema and the schema description for the result is the result of a specific and the result with a structured the output schema for the result of a clear: the result is a clear and the result of the schema with a specific and result in the score is covered by the purpose of the result is the result of a and the use and result and the schema for detail. The name of a specific and the result and the description of the answer: the query and more the result and the answer: The answer is the result and the answer to the description and the answer is the result and the answer is the result of the description and the answer is the result and the answer is the result of the description is the result and the answer is the result and the answer is the result and the answer is the result and the answer. The schema and the description and the answer. The schema and the answer is the result. The schema and the answer. The answer. The schema. The answer. The schema. The answer. The answer. The schema. The description.

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 clearly states the usage is the result and clearly and the schema and the description for the answer. The description does not explicitly name alternatives to the description for the usage and the analysis. The answer is clear and the answer. The schema is the answer. The schema. The answer.

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