get_parking_lots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies the operation is a 'get' (read-only by implication) and describes pagination via offset, but does not disclose response specifics or edge cases. It does not contradict anything, and with an output schema present, the additional context is minimal but adequate.

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 concise: a one-line summary followed by a focused list of parameters. No redundant information.

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 all parameters and the tool's purpose. With an output schema handling return values, the description is largely sufficient. However, it does not clarify behavior when latlng is omitted (optional but seemingly important for geographic search), which limits completeness slightly.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by explaining latlng format with an example, range units, limit default, and offset purpose, which is essential for correct invocation.

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 a clear action ('Get') with a specific resource ('parking lot information and availability') and location ('Prague'), fully distinguishing it from the sibling tools that target different data types.

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 gives clear context by specifying the resource and location, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions. Since siblings are all different categories, the context is sufficient for selection.

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