Get a Homeric Atlas place

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral nuance: a place the poem does not locate carries no coordinates at all, and every proposed identification is listed with its own coordinates, class, rubric, and sources. This informs the agent about unexpected data shape and evidential richness.

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 compact: a single opening sentence defining the operation and output, followed by one sentence giving usage conditions. Every clause earns its place, with no repetition of schema or annotation content.

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 output schema exists and the annotations cover safety and idempotence, the description provides what remains needed: purpose, usage context, and a key edge case about unlocated places. The tool is simple enough that this is fully sufficient.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters, including the slug example and locale enum. The description reinforces 'by slug' but does not add new detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 the action ('Get one place by slug') and the resource ('place'), and differentiates from the sibling list_homeric_places by emphasizing singular retrieval by slug. It also previews what is returned, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'when you need to weigh the evidence for a location, or to cite it.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5, but the intended use cases are clear.

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