search_parcels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by mentioning autocomplete behavior and specific return fields, but does not disclose further behavioral traits like rate limits or response structure.

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?

Three sentences: function, output, example. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information. Efficient and clear.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains return fields (district, area, GPS coordinates). It covers the essential aspects for a simple search tool, though pagination details implicit in limit param are not elaborated.

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 descriptions cover both parameters (100% coverage). The description adds an example value for 'q' ('146518_8.01') and clarifies it's a prefix search, providing context beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it searches land parcels by parcel ID prefix with autocomplete, specifies return fields (district, area, GPS coordinates), and distinguishes from sibling tools like search_transactions or search_by_area by focusing on ID prefix matching.

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 usage hint: 'Useful for finding exact parcel IDs, then searching transactions nearby.' This implies a workflow and context, though it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool.

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