addLabel

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, but the description doesn't add behavioral context beyond the return format. It doesn't state whether labels are persisted, whether existing labels are overwritten, or if there are side effects. The description is neutral and doesn't contradict annotations.

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 a single sentence that efficiently states the action and return format. It's front-loaded with the verb 'Add' and the resource 'property-based text labels for GeoJSON features'. No wasted words.

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 a complex input schema (nested GeoJSON with geometry types) and an output schema, but the description doesn't explain edge cases, error conditions, or how labels interact with existing features. The output schema covers return values, so that's not needed, but behavioral details are missing.

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 documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only mentioning the return format. The 'field' parameter is well-described in the schema, and 'style' has a description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 adds property-based text labels to GeoJSON features and specifies the return format. It distinguishes from siblings like addGeoJsonLayer (which adds layers) and addMarker (which adds point markers), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 implies usage for labeling GeoJSON features but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like addGeoJsonLayer or addMarker. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., layer must exist) 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.