get_territorial_codes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the level mapping and substring filtering behavior, but does not disclose the return format, case-sensitivity, limits, or error handling. This is adequate but incomplete for a lookup tool.

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 succinct sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the essential details (levels, filtering, usage hint) are efficiently conveyed.

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?

Despite being a simple tool with 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the description omits the return structure. It states 'look up...codes' but does not explain if results are a list, map, or include additional metadata. For a lookup tool, this is a notable gap in completeness.

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 50% (name described, level not). The description adds significant meaning to the level parameter by mapping each enum value to a code list identifier (CL_AREA, CL_CWT, CL_AMPHOE) and providing context (77 changwat). It reinforces the name parameter as accepting Thai or English substrings, adding value beyond the schema.

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 looks up Thai geography codes used by specific dimensions (AREA/CWT) and lists three levels with their code list identifiers. This provides a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_data or get_codelist_description.

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 advises to use this tool before calling get_data, providing direct guidance on when to invoke it. However, it does not mention any when-not-to-use scenarios or alternatives among siblings.

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