Gp Get Cell Value

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only a generic 'returns verifiable structured results' claim plus an opaque note that write/path limits depend on service capabilities; it does not explain out-of-bounds behavior, nodata handling, or coordinate system expectations for the location.

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?

It is short, but shortness here reflects under-specification rather than economy. The second clause is boilerplate that consumes space without adding actionable information.

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?

With three undocumented parameters, an output schema but a completely empty description of inputs, and no explanation of the sampling semantics, the definition is not sufficient for an agent to call the tool reliably even though the annotations cover safety.

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 0% for all three parameters, and the description supplies no meaning for raster_path, location_xy, or band_index. Nothing indicates the coordinate format, whether band_index defaults to the first band, or what happens when it is null.

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 essentially restates the tool name ('读取gp get cell value' = 'read gp get cell value'), with no verb+resource detail beyond what the title already conveys. It does not specify that it samples a raster cell value at a coordinate, nor distinguish it from siblings like arcgis_pro_raster_info or arcgis_pro_gp_get_raster_property.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. a valid raster path in a known workspace), and no routing to alternatives. The trailing clause about service capabilities is too vague to guide invocation decisions.

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