census_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only lists what is returned (cells, schema, build date), but omits whether it is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. The brief description provides minimal behavioral context.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence. It is front-loaded with the key output elements. However, it could include a bit more context without sacrificing conciseness, such as the purpose or format.

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 input parameters, no output schema, and a simple description, the tool is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on the return format, how the summary is structured, and how it relates to sibling tools. This leaves gaps for an AI agent to infer correctly.

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 tool has no parameters, and the input schema coverage is 100%. The description correctly implies no input is needed. Since there are no parameters to elaborate, the baseline score of 4 applies.

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 states it returns a 'Census summary: cells, schema, build date,' which indicates a retrieval of basic metadata. However, the term 'Pinned Census' is ambiguous, and the action (e.g., 'get' or 'retrieve') is implied rather than explicit. It partly distinguishes from siblings by focusing on summary, but not clearly enough.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_census_versions' or 'count_cells'. The description does not specify prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions.

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