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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and external-lookup profile is covered. The description adds useful provenance (official GUGiK address register), but says nothing about failure behavior when no match is found, so it adds only modest context.

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 tight sentences that front-load the action and output before the use case; no filler and nothing is buried.

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 one-parameter geocoder with no output schema, the description covers both input shape and the returned value (coordinates) and notes the authoritative source. It stops short of describing no-match behavior or the coordinate format an agent could expect.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema coverage the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema's example by clarifying accepted input granularity (address, street, or town), which meaningfully shapes how an agent formats queries.

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 (resolve) and resource (Polish address, street or town) with the output (coordinates) and the backing source (GUGiK register). It touches the sibling property_prices but does not contrast itself against data_sources, so differentiation is partial rather than explicit.

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?

Offers one motivating use case (checking which place property_prices will use), which implies when the tool is relevant, but gives no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives for choosing it over data_sources or property_prices.

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