tariff_get_median_canton

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds the constraint that canton names must be in German, which is useful, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions 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 very concise at three sentences, with the purpose stated first, followed by usage context and a parameter hint. No fluff or 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?

With 6 parameters and only one partially explained, the description leaves out important details (e.g., what limit does, filtering options for category/period). The output schema exists but is not referenced. Overall, the description is too sparse for the tool's complexity.

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 17% (only canton has a description). The description adds guidance for the canton parameter (German name examples) but offers no help for the other 5 parameters (limit, category, period_from, period_to, response_format). Given low coverage, the description should compensate more.

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 states the tool gets the cantonal median electricity tariff, with a specific verb and resource. It also explains its usefulness for positioning a municipality against its canton, distinguishing it from sibling tools like tariff_get_median_swiss or tariff_get_by_municipality.

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 context (positioning a municipality) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like tariff_get_median_swiss. No direct comparison or exclusion criteria are provided.

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