get_building_permits

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

The description lacks annotations, so it must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the data returned (costs, status, etc.) but does not disclose any operational behavior such as read-only property, authentication needs, rate limits, or data freshness. This is insufficient for a read tool with no annotations.

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?

The description is concise, consisting of three sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states the action, the second details what is shown, and the third provides usage context. Every sentence adds 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?

The description covers the main purpose and typical use, and an output schema exists to document return values. However, it lacks explanations for parameters (especially 'job_type' and 'limit') and does not mention any pagination or constraints. It is minimally adequate but not fully 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 and 3 parameters, the description should provide meaningful explanations beyond the schema. It implies 'bbl' is a property identifier but does not describe 'job_type' or 'limit' (e.g., valid values, effect on results). This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 DOB building permit filings and job applications for a property,' specifying the action (Get) and resource (building permits). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on construction permits, which is distinct from complaints or other property data.

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 advises 'Use this to understand planned or completed construction activity,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, missing some guidance compared to tools that name sibling alternatives.

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