Query CityObjects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses the supported attribute predicate operators (eq, neq, gt, gte, lt, lte, contains, in) and that thebbox is 2D. However, it does not disclose return shape, pagination behavior, how multiple predicates combine, or whether this is a read-only operation beyond what 'Query' implies.

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: one sentence states the purpose and filter capabilities, and the second sentence lists the supported predicate operators. There is no filler or redundant 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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but not complete. It explains the main query dimensions but omits attribute predicate object syntax, pagination semantics, how criteria are combined, and what the result contains, which an agent would need for reliable use.

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 only 29%, so the description must compensate. It maps the main params (ids, types, bbox, attributes) to filter categories and documents supported operators, which adds real value. However, it does not explain how attribute predicates are structured as an object or clarify the limit/offset parameters, leaving important gaps for correct invocation.

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 operation ('Query CityObjects') and enumerates the query dimensions: IDs, types, 2D bbox, and attribute predicates. It is specific enough to understand the core function, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from closely related siblings such as cityjson_list_objects or cityjson_get_object.

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?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies that it should be used for filtering CityObjects by the listed criteria, but it does not state exclusionary conditions or name sibling tools that might be more appropriate for listing all objects, fetching a single object, or subsetting.

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