Find Recommended Scheme for Property

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds significant context about return fields (range, instance_count, schemes, suggestion) and mentions 'actionable advice', which goes beyond 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 concise with clear sections (Args, Returns, Use when). Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return fields well. It could be slightly more explicit about when not to use, but overall sufficient for an agent to invoke 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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema, but the description adds a concrete example URI and explains its purpose ('URI of the property to analyze'), providing meaning beyond the schema type.

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 uses a specific verb ('find') and resource ('range class and associated SKOS ConceptSchemes'). It clearly distinguishes from many sibling tools focused on searching, browsing, or inspecting resources.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool (to find controlled vocabulary values or official ConceptSchemes). It lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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