Get parcel ArcGIS REST endpoint

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden. It lists what is returned but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or disclose any side effects, performance characteristics, or requirements. The description is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 sentence that efficiently enumerates all key outputs without redundancy. It is front-loaded and every element provides value.

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 lack of an output schema, the description adequately lists all expected return values. It could be strengthened by noting input validation or error handling, but is complete enough for a simple lookup tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both state and county. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 specific outputs: ArcGIS REST service URL, layer index, searchable field names, owner field, sample query, and UrbanKit deep-link for a county. It distinguishes from siblings like build_owner_query and find_county by focusing on endpoint retrieval.

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 usage when a parcel endpoint for a specific county is needed, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Siblings (build_owner_query, find_county) suggest a workflow, but no direct guidance is provided.

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