get_infrastructure

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint true, so description's disclosure of returns (distance+capacity, HIFLD/EIA join) adds value. No mention of rate limits or pagination, but sufficient for a read-only data retrieval 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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: what is returned, example call, when not to use. No wasted words. Front-loaded with core functionality.

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?

Returns a join of multiple datasets; description gives high-level structure. Lacks detail on pagination or how to handle large results, but for a raw data tool with good annotations and sibling context, it is reasonably complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description compensates by explaining lat, lon, radius_km explicitly in example, and implies layer and min_voltage_kv. However, 'limit' and 'layer' as parameters are not directly explained, leaving some ambiguity.

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 specifies exactly what infrastructure categories are returned (substations, transmission lines, pipelines, power plants) with clear verb 'returns' and resource 'infrastructure'. It distinguishes from sibling 'analyze_site' by explicitly stating not to use for a scored verdict.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (raw nearby assets) and when-not-to-use (site-suitability, use analyze_site). Includes a concrete example invocation with parameters, and names the alternative tool.

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