run_odin_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. While it describes the return types and data scope, it omits critical behavior such as whether the tool modifies data, rate limits, or performance expectations. The lack of such details leaves the agent uninformed about potential side effects or costs.

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 and well-structured. The opening sentence provides a clear summary, followed by a bullet-style list of parameters with concise explanations. Every line adds value without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 the tool's purpose, required inputs, optional filters, and general output categories. Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, no annotations, but an output schema exists), the description is largely complete. However, it could benefit from clarifying the output structure or providing a usage example for common scenarios.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description compensates excellently by providing detailed explanations, examples, and allowed values for each parameter (e.g., municipality examples, transport_mode list). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's minimal metadata.

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 the tool runs ODIN travel survey analysis for a Dutch location, specifying the data scale and returns. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like run_modal_split or run_odin_compare, which could cause confusion about when to use this tool over others.

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 explicitly states the key usage requirement: 'Provide at least one of: municipality, postcode, or province.' It also lists all optional filters. However, it does not provide guidance on when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives like siblings.

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