crehq_whitespace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the underlying data source and tier restrictions, but does not disclose behavior such as what happens when no whitespace exists, potential response format, or access limitations. Phrases like 'PREMIUM INTELLIGENCE' are promotional and do not add behavioral clarity.

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 two sentences and gets to the point quickly, but contains marketing fluff and an unnecessary 'PREMIUM INTELLIGENCE' lead-in. Despite minor excess, it remains reasonably concise.

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 is provided, so the description must clarify return values. It states a 'ranked, data-driven shortlist' but does not specify what fields are included, how results are structured, or how to interpret the output. It also does not elaborate on the 'country' parameter's role beyond the schema default.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema provides; it simply frames the overall purpose.

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 identifies the tool's function: it performs whitespace analysis to find postal codes/markets where competitors are present but the brand is absent. It uses specific terminology like 'ranked, data-driven shortlist' and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on expansion opportunities.

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 use for expansion planning ('where a chain should expand next') but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings or provide conditions for non-use. No alternative tools are mentioned, so guidance is only implicit.

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