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

Annotations already cover the safety profile: readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds the bbl/bin precedence rule, but it does not describe return format, error behavior, or any other behavioral traits beyond what the annotations and schema already provide.

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 two tight sentences with no wasted language. The primary purpose and identifier requirement are front-loaded, and the precedence rule follows naturally.

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 simple two-parameter read-only lookup, the description plus annotations and fully covered schema give enough information to invoke it correctly. The remaining minor gap is that it does not clarify the relationship to lookup_property or specify what the 'full fact sheet' contains.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the schema already explains both parameters and their formats. The description adds meaningful information beyond the schema by stating the precedence rule: if both bbl and bin are sent, bbl is used.

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 states a specific verb and resource: return the full fact sheet for a tax lot, identified by BBL or BIN. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling lookup_property tool.

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 gives the input condition that either bbl or bin is required and that bbl wins if both are sent. However, it does not explain when to use this tool instead of siblings such as lookup_property or search_properties.

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