Look up a Mecklenburg County address

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are drawn from an 'official master address list' and a partial list of returned fields, but says nothing about matching behavior, tolerance for partial/incomplete addresses, or ambiguity handling — relevant for a geocoder against an open-world dataset.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by useful return-content context. No filler, no repetition of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be enumerated, and rich annotations cover the safety profile. The description is adequate for a simple two-parameter read tool, though the missing guidance on matching semantics and the undocumented max_results leave a small gap.

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 50%: 'address' has an example, but 'max_results' has no description anywhere. The tool description does not mention either parameter, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented max_results parameter (cap of 10, default 5).

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Find an address in Mecklenburg County's official master address list'), which is far more concrete than a tautology. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the sibling 'get_address_profile', which an agent would reasonably assume also resolves an address. Clear purpose, but no explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this lookup versus alternatives such as get_address_profile or find_nearby_places, nor any statement of prerequisites (e.g., whether the input must be a full street address). Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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