Import CityJSON from the input inbox

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the result is an immutable dataset handle and that import succeeds only if the inbox contains exactly one JSON file when filename is omitted. This adds meaningful behavior beyond the schema, though it does not cover error cases or persistence details.

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?

Three sentences, zero filler, and the most important constraint (filename only, no path) is front-loaded. 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 tool with one optional parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the input source, parameter constraint, omission behavior, and return type. It is not exhaustive about failure modes or the handle format, but it is sufficient for correct invocation in most cases.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds important parameter semantics beyond the schema: never pass an absolute path, and the behavior when filename is omitted. This meaningfully disambiguates the single optional parameter.

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 ('Import'), a precise resource ('a CityJSON file already placed in the configured input inbox'), and an explicit outcome ('return an immutable dataset handle'). It also contrasts with the sibling cityjson_list_imports and cityjson_import_text by anchoring on the inbox source, so the agent can distinguish it from related tools.

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 gives clear context: the file must already be in the inbox, and the filename must be passed rather than an absolute path. It also explains the ambiguity condition when filename is omitted. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the intended usage is unmistakable.

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