get_districts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'List districts' and mentions the optional filter, but doesn't disclose pagination, sorting, default scope (all districts vs. top-level), or the effect of the 'raw' parameter. The tool could return a large dataset or have rate limits, none of which are mentioned.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and optional filter, followed by a use-case hint. No waste, but it's slightly terse given the lack of behavioral context.

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, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain what happens when area_id is omitted (e.g., returns all districts), nor does it mention any limits or response shape beyond the raw parameter. An agent could invoke it but might be surprised by the default behavior or data volume.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the phrase 'optionally filtered by area_id', which echoes the schema. It doesn't add new meaning about the 'raw' parameter or how the output differs. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool lists districts with an optional area_id filter, and even notes a use case (address/area fine-tuning). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_areas or get_countries, which operate at different granularity.

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 phrase 'Useful for address/area fine-tuning' provides a clear context for when to use the tool, but it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternative tools for broader area queries. It's clear enough but lacks exclusions.

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