Select Features

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

Annotations declare idempotentHint=true, indicating safe repetition. The description adds that selection is by expression or fids, but does not clarify whether selection replaces or adds to existing selection, or any side effects. No contradiction with 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 a single concise sentence (10 words) that efficiently states the purpose. It could benefit from slight expansion for clarity, but is not verbose.

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, so description should mention return value or confirmation. It does not. With 3 parameters and one required, the description covers basic inputs but lacks details on output and selection behavior.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It links 'expression' and 'feature IDs' to parameters expression and fids, but does not elaborate on syntax, format, or constraints beyond what the schema provides. Minimal added value.

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 (select), the resource (features in a layer), and the two methods (by expression or feature IDs). It distinguishes from siblings like clear_selection and get_selection.

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 usage by mentioning the two selection methods, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like clear_selection, get_selection, or identify_features. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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