get_geographic_distribution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions sorting by percentage descending, but does not discuss idempotency, rate limits, authentication, or data freshness. The basic read behavior is clear but lacks some depth.

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 moderately long but well-organized: purpose, data format, example questions, parameter usage, sorting. It is front-loaded with the most important information. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but it remains efficient.

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 that a separate output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, what the records represent, how to filter, and how results are sorted. The tool is simple and the description is 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds value by explaining how parameters work together (e.g., combining filters, default behavior when only segmentation_code is supplied). This goes beyond the schema's per-parameter descriptions.

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 the tool gets the geographic distribution of population segments across regions, provides a clear data format (percentage per region per segment), and includes example questions that distinguish its use from sibling tools like list_segments or get_segmentation.

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 gives concrete usage scenarios via example questions and explains how to use filters (segment_code, region_code) to answer different queries. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the context of sibling tools provides implicit alternatives.

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