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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, covering the write and external-service profile. The description confirms it writes into the object and calls an external map service, but adds little beyond what the annotations and the apply parameter already convey. No disclosure of rate limits, failure behavior, or reversibility.

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?

Purpose, behavior, and the sibling alternative are front-loaded and readable. The trailing 'EN: object, record, entry, property, link, search' keyword list is SEO-style filler that does not earn its place, slightly weakening an otherwise tight definition.

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 mutation tool that calls an external service with no output schema, the description plus annotations cover the essentials: what it does, when to use it, the write target, and the display alternative. Only error/return behavior is unaddressed, which is minor given annotations carry the safety profile.

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 100%, so udid, apply, and direction are all documented in the schema itself. The description's 'Adresse -> Lat/Lon' merely echoes the default geocode direction and adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (coordinates for an object, address -> Lat/Lon) and explicitly notes it writes into the object. It also differentiates from the sibling onto_interface_map_markers, so an agent can distinguish it without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use rule ('nach dem Anlegen eines Objekts mit Adresse, wenn Kartenmarker gebraucht werden') and routes display needs to onto_interface_map_markers. It lacks an explicit when-not condition, but the alternative is named and the trigger context is concrete.

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