nc_get_demographics_by_age

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without any mention of side effects, read-only guarantees, auth requirements, rate limits, or output characteristics. The tool appears to be a read operation, but that is only implicit and not explicitly disclosed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently. The structure is clear and wastes no words.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the data source and what is returned, but does not describe the structure of the age groups or any variations. Given the simplicity, this is sufficient but leaves room for improvement in specifying output details.

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 description coverage is 100%: the only parameter 'province' is described and has an enum. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. According to the calibration, a baseline of 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high and description does not compensate 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 action (Get), the resource (demographic breakdown by age groups), and the data source (2019 census). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like nc_get_population_stats, which covers population stats broadly but not specifically age-group breakdowns. The verb is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools. An agent must infer usage solely from the name and schema, without any contextual hints about appropriate scenarios.

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