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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by noting the return of attribute rows and geometry, the SQL-like nature of where, and a sampling pattern. It doesn't go into pagination details, but schema covers offset and limit.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, no fluff. The description efficiently conveys purpose, key parameters, and a usage tip in minimal space.

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 query tool with a rich schema and clear annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it queries, how to construct queries, and what to expect in return. It omits advanced error handling or edge cases, but those are not necessary for a well-scoped tool.

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% and all parameters have descriptions, so the description adds limited additional meaning. It does mention 'SQL-like where' and the sampling pattern, which provides some context beyond schema, but the schema already explains each parameter adequately. 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('an ArcGIS Feature Service / Map Service layer'), and distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing search_datasets as the source of URLs and listing query-specific parameters (where, out_fields, order_by, limit, offset). This clearly separates it from metadata tools like layer_info.

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 implies a workflow ('by its url (from search_datasets)') and provides a concrete usage tip for sampling all data (where="1=1" + out_fields="*"). It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives like layer_info or search_within, but the context is clear enough for a query tool.

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