gugik_bdoo

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

The description explains key behaviors: without output_dir only URL is returned, and add_to_project loads GPKG or packages GML/XML. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., file overwriting, network usage) and defers some detail to a sibling tool, limiting full 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?

The description is concise (three sentences) and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancies or fluff. The structure is easy to scan and clear.

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 input schema and presence of an output schema, the description covers core functionality and parameter interactions. It mentions a sibling for additional details. However, it lacks information on error handling, required permissions, or network dependencies, which would make it more 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining the purpose and effect of each parameter: teryt (required code), output_dir (controls return type), and add_to_project (loading/package behavior). It adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 downloads BDOO data for one powiat using a 4-digit TERYT code. It distinguishes itself from sibling gugik_bdot10k by noting BDOO ships only one package per powiat with no format choice, which makes its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides context for when to use this tool versus alternatives by comparing to gugik_bdot10k, and explains parameter behavior. However, it does not explicitly state situations where this tool should not be used or mention exclusions beyond the format choice.

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