Cijfers per provincie of stad

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals that the 'provincie' parameter can be left empty to return all provinces, and that 'minimum_rijscholen' defaults to 3. This gives useful behavioral insight beyond a mere static definition.

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, well-formed sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality and the main output dimensions. It is concise and fits the tool's simple nature without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context about the grouping logic (province or city) and the included metrics. It does not specify the response format, but that is not required here, making the description adequately complete for an agent to select and invoke the 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 schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (provincie and minimum_rijscholen) including their optionality and default behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already covers, so the baseline score of 3 is 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 clearly states that the tool returns average pass rates per province or per city within a province, along with counts of driving schools and exams. This distinctly differentiates it from siblings like 'landelijke_cijfers' (national) and 'school_cijfers' (per school), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 use for geographical breakdowns but does not explicitly indicate when to choose this tool over alternatives such as 'ranglijst' or 'cijfers_over_tijd'. No direct comparison or selection guidance is provided, leaving some inference to the agent.

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