get_gardens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' implies read-only, and pagination parameters are explained, but there is no disclosure about result ordering, error handling, or behavior when filters are omitted.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence purpose followed by a concise, well-formatted parameter list. Every line adds meaningful information without unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the purpose and all parameters with clear usage details, and the output schema handles return values. However, it does not state the optionality or default behavior when latlng/range are omitted, a minor but notable gap.

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 descriptions are entirely absent (0% coverage), but the description provides explicit meanings for all five parameters, including latlng format, range units in meters, districts as comma-separated codes, and pagination semantics. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 'Get public garden locations in Prague' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools about other city services. No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 purpose implies when to use the tool (for garden-related queries), but no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives is provided. No exclusions or references to sibling tools.

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