swisstopo_search_layers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds the critical behavioral detail that it returns layer IDs only, not feature data, which is beyond what annotations provide.

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 extremely concise, using structured tags for key points. Every sentence adds value, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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 that an output schema exists (not shown but context indicates true), the description doesn't need to explain return values. It fully covers the use case, important notes, and integration with sibling tools.

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?

While the input schema provides descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage), the description does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond 'find layer IDs'. Since schema descriptions are already clear, the description offers no extra semantic 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?

Description clearly states the tool searches the Swisstopo layer catalog (500+ layers) for geodatasets. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's the first step to find layer IDs for use with swisstopo_identify_features and swisstopo_find_features.

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 <use_case> tag explicitly states this is the first step of feature research, and <important_notes> clarifies it returns layer IDs, not feature data. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and differentiation from downstream tools.

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