gus_get_population

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the default return set (all voivodeships) and the year default, which gives agents a good behavioral understanding. However, it does not mention potential limitations or error cases.

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 very concise (three sentences) with the most important information front-loaded. No unnecessary words 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?

Given the tool has only 2 optional parameters, high schema coverage, and an output schema (not shown but present), the description is complete enough. It covers purpose, default behavior, and how to use the optional parameter.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the effect of unit_name (to filter results) and the default for year. It also gives a concrete example for unit_name, which enhances understanding beyond the schema 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 fetches demographic (population) data from GUS BDL, with a specific verb ("Pobierz") and resource (ludność z GUS BDL). It distinguishes from sibling tools like gus_get_average_salary and gus_get_unemployment_rate by explicitly mentioning population as the data type.

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 the default behavior (all 16 voivodeships) and how to narrow results using the unit_name parameter. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with siblings, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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