raster_calculator

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

No annotations provided, so description carries behavioral disclosure. It states expressions are restricted to declared variable names, no inline paths or Python execution, and validated map-algebra syntax. However, it does not discuss error handling, output behavior, or the overwrite parameter's effect.

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?

Three concise sentences that front-load the primary purpose, follow with use cases, and end with constraints and license requirement. No unnecessary words, though the list of use cases could be comma-separated more cleanly.

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 detailed input schema, the description covers the essential context: tool type, use cases, license requirement, and syntax restrictions. It adequately distinguishes from sibling tools and sets user expectations for a safe invocation.

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 already provides detailed descriptions for each parameter (rasters, variable_names, expression, out_raster, overwrite). The description adds no new parameter-specific information beyond reiterating variable_names usage, so it meets the baseline expectation without additional 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 runs Spatial Analyst map algebra using ArcPy RasterCalculator, with specific use cases like NDVI, suitability models, and binary masks. It distinguishes from sibling raster tools like clip_raster or project_raster by focusing on algebraic expressions.

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?

Provides explicit use cases (NDVI, suitability models, etc.) and a prerequisite (Spatial Analyst license). Does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the context of map algebra is clear enough for an agent to apply it appropriately.

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