sg_hawker_centres

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It merely states the basic purpose without revealing whether it returns a list, how query filtering works, what the output format is, or any limitations. This is a critical gap for a tool with no other structured safety or behavioral metadata.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It accomplishes the basic purpose in a concise manner, earning full marks for conciseness and structure.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should clarify what information is returned and the effect of the optional query. It doesn't mention return format or provide usage context, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's expected behavior. The tool is simple, but completeness still requires more than a bare statement.

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 fully describes the only parameter 'query' as 'Search by name or area', so coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter context, but since the schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline score of 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 'Get Singapore hawker centre information' clearly identifies the resource (hawker centres) and the action (get). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like weather or transport tools, but it could be more explicit about whether it lists all centres or searches, so it lacks full sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other Singapore-specific tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It also doesn't mention whether the query parameter is required or how the tool behaves with or without it.

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