pop_density

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that it gets an estimate but does not disclose output format, error behavior, or any side effects. A 2 reflects minimal transparency beyond the basic operation.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words; it efficiently conveys the tool's function.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value format (e.g., people per km^2), data source limitations, or how to handle edge cases like invalid coordinates. Agents may struggle to interpret the output correctly.

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 100% with each parameter described. The description adds value by clarifying that the tool accepts either a coordinate (lat/lng) or a country code, which is not explicitly stated in the schema. This helps agents understand proper usage patterns.

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 'Get population density estimate' with specific scope (coordinate or country) and data source (WorldPop). It distinguishes the tool from sibling population tools like pop_growth by targeting density specifically, though it could be more explicit about what differentiates it from other pop_* tools.

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 guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as pop_age_structure or pop_growth. There is no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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