Merge CityJSON datasets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says a new dataset_id is returned; it does not state whether the input datasets are mutated or remain open, whether merging requires compatible CRs/schemata, or whether the operation has side effects. For a transformation tool, these are material gaps.

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 short sentences with no redundancy. The operation is front-loaded and the return value is stated clearly. Every phrase contributes to the tool's selection and invocation.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core operation, the input princile, and the return value as a new dataset_id. It does not exhaustively describe merge semantics or error conditions, but an agent has enough information to call it correctly.

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 0%, so the description carries more responsibility. It partially compensates by indicating the inputs are 'opened CityJSON datasets' and 'two or more', which maps to the dataset_ids array and minItems=2, but it does not explain that entries must be dataset handle strings. That detail only lives in the schema's item description.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Merge' on a specific resource 'CityJSON datasets', with a clear input condition ('opened') and method ('with cjio'). The sibling list contains no other merge-like tool, so the agent can distinguish this operation from alternatives.

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 phrase 'opened CityJSON datasets' clearly indicates datasets must already be loaded/open, and 'two or more' sets the cardinality condition. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough for selection.

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