Get property permits (on-demand)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does so thoroughly: it discloses caching, the asynchronous harvest enqueing side effect, IPFS storage after completion, and the polling requirement. This is well beyond what the schema or title would imply.

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, each carrying distinct value: what it fetches, the caching/async behavior, and the persistence layer. The most important action and condition are front-loaded; no filler or repetition.

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 tool has no output schema, but the description explains both possible outcomes (cached permits versus in-progress status) and gives the timing for polling. This is sufficient for an agent to invoke it and interpret the result without additional hidden assumptions.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains both parcelId and countyFips with examples and defaults. The description adds only 'by parcel ID' but does not materially extend parameter semantics 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?

Starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch permit records for a property by parcel ID.' It clearly defines the scope (property-level) and the primary key (parcel ID), which distinguishes it from sibling query-oriented tools such as queryPermits.

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?

Gves a clear operational contract: returns cached data immediately, otherwise enqueues a harvest job and tells the caller to poll again after ~90 seconds. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like queryPermits or getPermitCoverage, but the intended usage context is clear.

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