get_granny_flat_rules

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the Queensland exception (the state row exists only to say no standard) and that lga filters support partial matches. These are meaningful behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose.

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 three short paragraphs, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then return behavior, then arguments. Every sentence earns its place with useful information and no redundancy.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description explains return content and filtering behavior, including the Queensland nuance. It lacks error/edge-case details, but for a simple lookup tool with two params, it is fairly complete.

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%, but the Args section fully compensates: state codes are listed with examples, lga is described as optional with partial-match behavior, and concrete examples are given. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get granny flat / secondary dwelling approval rules for an Australian state.' It clarifies the return includes state-level and council-level rules, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools about data freshness and state comparison.

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 implies use when approval rules for a state are needed, and provides optional council filtering, but it does not explicitly contrast with siblings or state when not to use. The context is clear but alternatives are not mentioned.

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