crs_transform_point

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

With no annotations, the disclosure explains axis order and QGIS conventions, which is adequate for a read-only transformation. No destructive behaviors or auth needs to disclose.

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 well-structured with two paragraphs, front-loading the core purpose. Minor redundancy in examples could be trimmed.

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?

Output schema exists but isn't described; however, the transformation is simple enough that a single numeric return (or pair) is implied. Lacks error handling details.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining axis order and units for different CRS, though it doesn't explicitly define each parameter's format.

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 uses specific verb 'reproject' and resource 'single 2D point', clearly distinguishing it from sibling CRS tools like crs_list_polish or crs_height_transform.

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 examples of acceptable CRS strings and references a sibling for Polish CRS, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch reprojection or layer CRS assignment.

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