get_park_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. The description implies a read-only operation by saying 'Get metadata', but does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects or require no special permissions. For a simple retrieval tool, this is adequate but not explicit.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides usage examples. Every sentence adds value, and there is no extraneous information.

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 (zero parameters, clear output), the description is fully complete. The output schema exists, so the description does not need to detail return values. The sibling tools are all distinct, providing sufficient context for the agent to select this tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it correctly focuses on the output.

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 retrieves metadata (name, timezone, contact info) about the configured park. The verb 'Get' and resource 'metadata about the configured park' are specific and distinct from siblings which deal with reservations, sites, etc.

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 explicit example queries ('which park am I configured for?', 'what timezone are reservations in?', 'show me the address on file') that clearly indicate when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the examples and sibling context make usage unambiguous.

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