Tile rendering info for any completed processing job (clip/bathy outputs).

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. Description adds that it applies only to completed jobs and clip/bathy outputs, which is useful context. However, no disclosure of authorization needs, rate limits, or response behavior beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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, which is concise. However, it essentially repeats the title verbatim. It is minimally structured and does not use front-loading effectively to highlight key information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what the tile info contains (e.g., tile JSON URLs, bounds) or at least hint at the response structure. It does not. Additionally, prerequisites like 'job must be completed' are implied but not explicitly stated. For a tool with 2 params and no output schema, this is incomplete.

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 0%, yet the description provides no parameter details. The two parameters (job_id, x-api-key) are left entirely unexplained. The description should have clarified the role of job_id (the ID of the completed processing job) and x-api-key (authentication), but it did not.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like clip.job.tile_info or processing.job.get. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., job must be completed, must have clip/bathy outputs) 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.