tariff_get_by_municipality

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavioral context: return value breakdown and filterability. However, it omits details on data freshness, possible empty results, or pagination behavior, which would enhance transparency.

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 three sentences, each adding value: purpose, output breakdown, and filter options with example. No extraneous information; front-loaded with the core action.

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 presence of an output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers the main functional aspects and provides a practical example. It lacks guidance on optional parameters like limit and response_format, but the example compensates for typical use.

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 only 33%, and the description compensates partially by explaining bfs_nr with an example and mentioning category and year range. However, it does not clarify limit, period_to, period_from, or response_format beyond what the schema provides.

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 retrieves ElCom tariff observations for a specific Swiss municipality, detailing the output breakdown and filter options. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tariff_get_median_swiss or tariff_compare_municipalities that operate at different levels.

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 for obtaining detailed tariff data for a single municipality, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools nor specify when not to use it. The example and filter mentions provide context but lack direct guidance on alternatives.

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