get_evictions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns executed evictions (not filed), covers since 2017, and distinguishes query performance (local DB vs Socrata API). It does not mention rate limits, authentication, or error handling, but for a read operation this is sufficient.

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 and front-loaded: first sentence states the purpose, then expands with details, usage guidance, and an Args section. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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?

Despite no annotations and 5 parameters, the description covers purpose, use cases, parameter details, data sources, and mutual exclusivity. The presence of an output schema (noted in context) handles return values, so the description is complete for an agent to use this tool 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter in detail (address, bbl, eviction_type, since_year, limit) including defaults, mutual exclusivity, and year range. It adds value beyond the schema's property names and types.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource ('Get marshal eviction execution records for a property address') and clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing on evictions only. It also outlines the scope (citywide from 2017, residential/commercial) and query methods (BBL vs address).

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 explains when to use this tool ('assess tenant instability and cash-flow risk') and provides guidance on parameter selection ('provide either address OR bbl (not both)'). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but sibling tools are clearly different.

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