run_modal_split

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

States output is base64 PNG, but lacks detail on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or behavior if multiple location parameters are provided (e.g., both municipality and postcode). No annotation coverage to compensate.

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?

Description is concise: two sentences plus argument list. Front-loaded with purpose and output format. No unnecessary 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?

Covers purpose, output format, and parameters adequately. No output schema, so return type is specified. Missing details on error handling or constraints (e.g., only one location should be provided), but overall sufficient for a 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 5 parameters are described with examples (e.g., municipality: 'Amsterdam') and year range (2004-2023), adding significant meaning beyond schema's type-only definitions. Schema coverage is 0%, so description compensates well.

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?

Clearly states it generates modal split analysis (Marimekko chart) for a location, with specific location parameters (municipality, postcode, province). Distinguishes from sibling tools like run_odin_* by output type and analysis focus.

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?

Implies usage for modal split analysis, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus other run tools (e.g., run_odin_query). No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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