Run Geoprocessing

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: outputs are overwritten, and the tool returns arcpy messages. This covers the most important behavioral traits for a generic geoprocessing runner, though it could mention error handling or permissions.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, examples, warning, overwrite behavior, return value. It is front-loaded and concise with no wasted words.

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 complexity of running arbitrary geoprocessing tools, the description covers how to specify the tool and params, includes a critical warning, and states output behavior and return value. With an output schema existing, this is fully adequate.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds substantial meaning: 'tool' is a dotted name like 'analysis.Buffer', 'params' is an array of positional parameters. Examples clarify the format. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 runs any ArcPy geoprocessing tool by dotted name with positional parameters, with concrete examples. It distinguishes from sibling tools which are domain-specific, making the 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 a strong usage guideline: always check coordinate systems with describe_data before distance/area operations. It also notes outputs are overwritten. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives, but the context is clear.

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