arcgis_pro_raster_basinDelineates drainage basins from a D8 flow direction raster and verifies the resulting basin output.
从 D8 流向栅格划分流域并核验新输出。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| out_raster | Yes | ||
| environment | No | ||
| in_flow_direction_raster | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two useful behavioral facts beyond that: the input must be a D8 flow direction raster (a validity constraint) and that the new output is verified. It omits overwrite behavior and required permissions, so with the annotation bar lowered this lands at 3.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the operation comes first and the verification clause second. It is arguably too sparse for a raster-analysis tool, but nothing in it is wasted.
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?
An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still, with 0% schema description coverage the description leaves the environment parameter unexplained and gives no routing to the watershed sibling, so it is only adequately complete for a three-parameter raster 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. It identifies the flow-direction raster input and implies a new output raster, covering two of three parameters, but the 'environment' parameter receives no mention anywhere. Partial compensation only.
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 operation (delineate basins/watersheds) on a specific resource (D8 flow direction raster) and adds an output-verification step, so the agent knows what the tool does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely related sibling arcgis_pro_raster_watershed (which uses pour points rather than full D8 delineation), so a 5 is not warranted.
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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative tool is named. The D8 flow direction input implies a context, but the agent is left to infer that a D8-derived flow direction raster is a prerequisite and that watershed/pour-point workflows use a different tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.