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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists returned data types but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, whether address resolution has constraints, or any error behavior.

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 a single compact sentence with zero filler, front-loading the subject matter and listing the key returned data types efficiently.

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 low-complexity lookup tool with one fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate: it lists the data returned. However, it omits when to use it versus sibling real-estate or geocoding tools, data coverage, and any behavioral context, leaving clear gaps.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), including that it accepts a street address or GPS coordinates. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource—parcel zoning information—and enumerates the returned data categories (zoning codes, parcel boundaries, max building height/FAR, permitted commercial uses). It is clear what the tool retrieves, but it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools such as getCommercialRealEstate or validateAddressGeocode.

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 no guidance on when or when not to use this tool, nor does it name alternatives. It is purely a list of data categories with no usage context.

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