Steden met rijscholen

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

The description discloses the return content (cities with number of schools, average pass rate, price) and the default behavior when no province is specified (all of the Netherlands). However, it does not mention pagination, sorting, or error handling, which are potential gaps given the lack of annotations.

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, concise sentence efficiently conveying the tool's purpose and key default behavior without unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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?

While the description provides the core information about the returned data, it lacks details on output format (e.g., list of city names with fields) and does not mention any additional limits or ordering. Given the absence of an output schema, these details are missing but may not be critical for this simple 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?

All three parameters are described with clear semantics: limiet (default 50), provincie (restricts to one, with allowed values listed), and minimum_rijscholen (default 3). The schema coverage is 100%, and the descriptions add valuable default values and constraints.

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 all places with driving schools, including counts, average pass rate, and average price. It is specific to listing cities with aggregates, and the mention of province filtering helps distinguish it from sibling tools focused on individual schools or provinces.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only hints at optional province filtering but does not explain scenarios where this tool is preferred over siblings like 'zoek_rijscholen' or 'rijschool_in_de_buurt'.

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