Get tender statistics by province or city

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool's statistical aggregation behavior and the hierarchical drill-down capability (province → city). However, it doesn't mention performance characteristics, data freshness, or potential limitations like result size constraints.

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 tightly constructed sentences with zero waste: first establishes core purpose, second explains parameter hierarchy, third clarifies default behavior. Every sentence earns its place by adding distinct value.

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 read-only statistical tool with good schema coverage, the description provides adequate context about scope and behavior. The main gap is lack of output format information (no output schema), but the description compensates somewhat by specifying what statistics are returned (ranking, top buyers, top CPV categories).

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by explaining the hierarchical relationship between province and city parameters and clarifying the default behavior when no arguments are provided.

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 verb 'retrieve' and resource 'aggregate tender statistics', specifies geographic scope (Polish provinces/cities), and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on statistical aggregation rather than individual entity lookup or search operations.

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 provides clear context about when to use different parameter combinations (no arguments for full ranking, province for province-level, city for city-level details). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool versus alternatives like get_category_stats or search_tenders.

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