parcel.compare

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

No annotations provided, but the description clarifies that the agent is responsible for scoring and ranking, and that criteria are echoed back. It does not mention destructive actions, auth needs, or rate limits, but the behavioral scope is well-defined for a compare-only tool.

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 four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, output and agent role, use case label, and usage boundaries. No redundant 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?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description adequately explains input format, output content (full reports per parcel), the agent's role in scoring, and the tool's place in the workflow (underwriting/shortlist loop).

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%, and the description adds value beyond the schema by providing an example ID format ("37183:0012345"), specifying how to obtain IDs, and explaining that the criteria argument is echoed back for scoring.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Fetch reports for 2–25 parcels so they can be ranked against criteria' and distinguishes from sibling tools by noting alternatives for discovery (parcel.search) and single-property lookup (parcel.lookup + hazard.score).

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?

Clearly states when to use: 'when the user has identified candidate properties' and includes explicit negative instructions: 'Do NOT use to discover new candidates (use parcel.search) or for a single property (use parcel.lookup + hazard.score).'

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