Get Perennials

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by detailing the return structure (Perennial objects with fields) and the default/max for top. No contradiction with annotations.

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 fairly concise, with a clear opening line, a brief definition of perennials, and structured args/returns. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, though the docstring style could be slightly more compact.

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?

Given no output schema, the description includes the return type and fields, which is good. It covers the main functionality (listing, filtering, pagination) but does not mention error handling, rate limits, or additional context needed for effective use.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains that filter is an OData $filter string (with an example) and top is max results with a default of 100. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema properties.

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 perennial plants from the SIA PerennialsService, defines what perennials are (long-lived plants linked to fields), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like sia_get_fields or sia_get_areas by specifying the resource.

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 clear context that the tool is for listing perennials with optional filtering and pagination, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use. The sibling tools list is available, but no direct guidance is given.

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