parse_legal_description

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false; the description reinforces this ('Makes no network call') and adds real behavior context beyond annotations: the accepted input dialects, aliquot expansion behavior, and that `warnings` reports guesses while `raw` preserves the original text.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then format coverage, then output semantics, then routing. Dense but each clause carries information; the format examples are somewhat list-heavy but justified for a parser.

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, and the description covers the key return concepts (`raw`, `warnings`) though not their exact structure. Given a two-parameter read-only parser, an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning by enumerating the accepted text formats (0840N/0390W, T84N R39W, E½NE, words, lots, tracts) and explaining that state allows a missing meridian to be inferred.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Read a Public Land Survey description into its parts.' It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like plss_locate by describing the parse step and routing the placement step elsewhere.

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?

Ends with an explicit handoff: 'Pass a tract to plss_locate to place it on the map,' and notes 'Makes no network call,' which frames when to use it locally. No explicit when-not-to-use case, but the alternative is named and the boundary is clear.

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