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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the aggregation method (census tracts whose centroid falls within each radius) and lists the demographic metrics. Could mention US-only limitation or data availability, but overall transparent.

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?

Three focused sentences: purpose, details, and usage alternative. No wasted words, well-organized.

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?

Input parameters are clearly covered. The output schema exists (not shown), so detailed return documentation is not needed, but description still lists the metrics. Usage context and alternatives are provided. Complete for decision-making.

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% with clear descriptions of address and radii_miles. The description does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, though it gives helpful context about the aggregation logic. 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?

Clearly states the tool gets aggregated Census demographics for radius rings around a US property address. Specifically mentions the standard 1/3/5-mile trade-area format and lists the metrics returned, distinguishing it from the sibling get_market_demographics.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (trade-area/site analysis) and when not to, with a direct alternative: 'Use get_market_demographics for the single census tract immediately around the address.'

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