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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'generate', leaving unclear whether the n and value parameters affect output, what the return format is, and what locale or address format is used.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the tool's behavior with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is thin: it does not state that both parameters are optional or ignored, what the output shape is, or whether any address format options exist. An agent could invoke it, but would be guessing about parameters and result format.

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 schema already contains descriptions for both parameters, so the high-coverage baseline applies. However, the description adds no meaning about n or value, and does nothing to clarify why a random address generator takes generic 'N to process' and 'Value to process' parameters.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Generate a random street address.' The qualifier 'street' distinguishes it from address-normalize, address-parse, and address-validate siblings, and from other random-* tools like random-name and random-phone.

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 when-to-use guidance and does not contrast this tool with the many random-* or address-related siblings. An agent must infer from the name alone that this is the right tool for generating a random street address.

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