lookup_parcel

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral context such as 'needs no API key' and lists extensive return data. It does not contradict annotations and provides transparency beyond what annotations convey.

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 a single comprehensive paragraph that front-loads the core purpose. While it is detailed, every sentence adds value. It could be more structured, but it is well-organized and not overly verbose given the tool's complexity.

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 no output schema, the description fully covers the return values and context (Hawaii property lookup, hazards, Hawaiian geography, etc.). It is complete and leaves no significant gaps for an agent to understand what the tool returns.

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 100%, and the description mentions 'by address or TMK' but does not add significant new semantic detail beyond the schema descriptions for 'tmk' and 'address'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it looks up a full Āina Atlas parcel record by address or TMK, listing numerous return fields. It distinguishes itself as the 'core lookup' from siblings like compare_parcels and resolve_address, making 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 implies use for single parcel lookups but does not explicitly state when to use alternatives. However, it provides clear context that this is the primary lookup tool, which is sufficient for most cases.

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