zonal_statistics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds useful context by naming the extension requirement and mentioning the return table, but it omits side effects such as whether output_table is created, overwritten, or optional in practice.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and followed by the key prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

Given the full schema coverage and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose and the extension prerequisite, though it could say more about output-table behavior since no annotations exist.

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 the input schema fully documents all seven parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline score of 3 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 names a specific operation (summarise raster values inside zone polygons) and the output (a table). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as sample_raster_values, get_field_statistics, or summarize_features.

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 states a prerequisite ('Requires the Spatial Analyst extension'), which implies when the tool can be used. However, it does not compare against alternatives or specify when-not to use it, so usage guidance remains only implied.

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