get_hpd_registration

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the types of information returned (managing agent, etc.) but does not mention error handling, authentication needs, or behavior for invalid BBLs. The missing details limit full transparency.

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 composed of four concise, front-loaded sentences. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second details the output, and the last two provide usage context. No redundant or vague language exists.

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 simple lookup tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, what data it returns, and a key context (building size requirement). It is almost complete, though it could mention return format or read-only nature.

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?

The only parameter 'bbl' has no schema description (0% coverage) and the description does not explain what BBL means or its format. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name, leaving the agent without important context for constructing valid requests.

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 it retrieves HPD building registration and contact info, listing specific contact types (managing agent, corporate owner, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like get_hpd_complaints by focusing on registration data, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 specifies that registration is required for buildings with 3+ residential units and directly says 'Use this to find who manages or owns a building.' It provides clear context for when to use the tool but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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