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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, matching the description's read-only external lookup. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the exact return shape (ids, names, Umarelli URLs) and a non-obvious default that New York City is assumed unless "Jersey City" is included in the query.

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 tight sentences: purpose and geography first, return values and the fetch handoff second, the location default last. No filler and nothing redundant with structured fields.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description compensates by naming what is returned (ids, names, page URLs). Combined with the annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 the schema supplies an address example, so the baseline is 3. The description exceeds that by documenting the location-defaulting behavior — an agent must know to embed "Jersey City" in the query string to search there, which the schema alone does not convey.

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 ("Find buildings") and scopes it geographically to New York City or Jersey City by street address. It explicitly contrasts with the sibling fetch by explaining that this returns ids to pass onward, so an agent can tell the two apart without inspecting schemas.

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 clear when-to-use context (address lookup) and an explicit alternative: "pass an id to fetch for the full record." It does not address the other sibling, recent_permits, but the routing to fetch is unambiguous.

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