get_cities

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only. The description adds behavioral context: it shows warnings for cities losing loyalty with flip timers. This goes beyond the annotation, but does not detail other behaviors like output format (though output schema exists).

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. First sentence states the main purpose and lists attributes. Second sentence adds key detail about id usage and loyalty flip timers. No fluff, perfectly sized.

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 the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and the description covers the core information (list of cities with key attributes and id usage), it is fully complete. The agent has enough context to use the tool 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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description's job is minimal. Baseline is 4 as per rules. The description adds value by explaining what the returned data contains (e.g., yields, id, loyalty warnings), which helps the agent understand the output without parameter semantics needed.

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 it lists all cities with specific attributes (yields, population, production, growth, loyalty). It distinguishes itself by noting the city id is needed for production commands, implying this is the primary city overview tool among siblings like get_city_production.

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 implicitly guides by stating the city id is needed for production commands, but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like get_city_production or get_city_states. No direct exclusions or context for when not to use this tool.

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