nhgis_get_extract

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that download links are included only when the extract is complete, which is a key conditional behavior. It does not detail error states or permissions, but these are less critical for a read-only status endpoint.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds a useful conditional detail in the second sentence.

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?

For a one-parameter status-retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, the target resource, and the key behavioral outcome (download links when complete). It does not explain the exact return structure, but that is not essential for this simple tool.

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 input schema already fully describes the single parameter (extractNumber) and its meaning. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond restating 'by its number,' so it meets the baseline for schema coverage but does not go further.

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 gets the status and details of a specific NHGIS extract by its number. The verb 'Get' plus the resource and identifier make the purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from sibling tools like nhgis_list_extracts and microdata_get_extract.

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 when to use the tool: when you have a specific extract number and need its status/details. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a simple retrieval tool.

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