select_by_location

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool creates a new feature class, uses a pipeline, and removes a temporary layer. It does not discuss permissions, reversibility, or performance impacts, which would add 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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, usage guidance, and outcome. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information. Excellent structure.

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?

Covers core function and pipeline but lacks details on return values (output schema exists but not described), relationship enum values, search_distance usage, and edge cases like overwrite behavior. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 description adds minimal parameter context beyond the schema, which already has detailed descriptions for each parameter. The description mentions the pipeline but doesn't explain parameter choices or syntax. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema coverage appears high.

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 materializes a spatial selection into a new feature class using a specific pipeline. It specifies the use case with spatial relationships like intersect, contain, within, near. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like intersect_features or spatial_join, which also create new outputs.

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 says 'Use this to persist features' giving a clear usage context. But it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives like attribute-based selection (select_by_attribute) or non-persistent selection.

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