Transform Coordinates

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict. Beyond annotations, it specifies input/output formats and confirms no side effects. It adds value by detailing how the tool behaves with different geometry types.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states purpose, the second details accepted inputs and output format. No waste, front-loaded, and easy to parse.

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 output schema exists, the description suffices by covering inputs and output format. It lacks error or CRS format details, but for typical coordinate transformation this is complete enough.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the bbox, point, and points parameters with explicit format templates. The CRS parameters are self-explanatory from names. Could improve by noting mutual exclusivity of geometry inputs.

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?

Clearly states the tool transforms coordinates between CRS. Specifies exact input formats (point, point list, bbox) and output format. Unambiguous verb-resource combination, distinct from sibling tools.

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 when coordinate transformation is needed, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives among siblings. However, the inclusion of input format details gives adequate context for when it is applicable.

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