geoportal_add_service

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like whether the operation modifies project state, if it overwrites existing layers, or any side effects. The description focuses on input patterns but omits outcome details.

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?

Description is reasonably concise and front-loaded with purpose. The list of patterns is somewhat lengthy but necessary for clarity. Could be slightly more compact by referencing the catalog more heavily.

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 tool's simplicity and existence of output schema, the description provides sufficient information to use it correctly. It covers usage context, service_id patterns, and alternatives, leaving minimal gaps.

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%. The description thoroughly explains `service_id` with patterns and catalog reference, adding significant meaning. However, `layer_name` (optional) is not explained, leaving ambiguity about its purpose.

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 it adds a layer from a short catalog of ready-made Geoportal Krajowy services. It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that for anything not in the catalog, use `ows_list_capabilities` + `wms_add_layer`/`wfs_add_layer` with explicit URL.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool (for catalog entries without URLs) and when not (for other services, use explicit URL alternatives). Provides clear context for agent decision-making.

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