City neighbourhoods

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive semantics, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the scale of the result set (Tehran ~450) and the shape of each record (ids, centre point, streets), which helps the agent anticipate output volume. It does not discuss truncation or the default limit behavior beyond what the schema states.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and zero filler. The routing sentences are compact, though the trailing 'Next: dv_neighbours' is only marginally valuable.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by naming the returned fields (ids, centre point, streets). Annotations cover the safety profile. Pagination/ordering behavior is not described, a minor gap for a potentially 450-item result.

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 100%, so all three parameters (city, limit, query) are already fully documented with defaults, constraints and examples. The description adds no additional parameter syntax or meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (neighbourhoods/districts of one city) and what each record contains (ids, centre point, main streets), with a volume hint. It explicitly distinguishes itself from search siblings, noting they take district names directly while this tool supplies the underlying ids.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use cases ('to get the district ids for a districts filter', 'to pick coordinates for dv_nearby'), an exclusionary note that dv_search and other search tools don't need it, and a next-step route to dv_neighbours. Nothing is left to inference.

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