List Great Coffee Roasters

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions listing/filtering, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose return format, ordering, or the exact meaning of 'curated.' Given the absence of annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action ('List...'), and each sentence adds value: the first defines the tool, the second provides use cases. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a simple list tool with 3 optional parameters and full schema coverage, the description gives adequate purpose and use-case context. However, since there is no output schema and no annotations, the agent might not know what fields are returned. Still, the description covers the core invocation context well.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates filtering by country and reputation tier, adding no extra semantic detail beyond the schema. The 'limit' parameter is not mentioned in the description.

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 tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'List curated specialty coffee roasters from the database, filtered by country and reputation tier.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_cafes or get_cafe_details, which focus on different entities (cafes, details).

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 provides clear use cases: 'finding cafes that serve a given roaster's beans, or planning a roaster-focused trip.' This gives contextual guidance on when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions relative to sibling tools.

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