find_city

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds behavioral nuance beyond annotations: it discloses the disambiguation rule for duplicate town names (appending ', <region>') and that results are intended for use as the `city` parameter elsewhere. This is meaningful added context, though it doesn't discuss pagination or result volume.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the purpose, the second provides the essential usage follow-up. The most important information is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with rich annotations, an output schema, and no competing city-related siblings, the description covers everything needed: what it does, how to call it (via schema), and how to consume the result. No critical operational or usage detail is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%; the `query` parameter is fully documented in the schema ('City name or its beginning, e.g. «Березовский» or «Каменск»'). The tool description does not add significant semantic detail about the parameter beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 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 a specific verb-resource pair: finding cities in the shop's directory by name and returning their region. It clearly distinguishes this from all siblings, which deal with products, reviews, stores, and comparisons, not city lookups.

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 second sentence explicitly instructs how to use the result: 'Use the exact name (plus ', <region>' when several towns share it) as `city` in other tools.' This tells the agent when and how to apply the tool's output, making the call context concrete.

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