Autocomplete US City

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by stating 'Read-only with no side effects,' mentioning the API key requirement, rate limits, free tier availability, and error behavior. No contradictions with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by usage guidance, sibling differentiation, and additional context. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose with no redundancy. Two lines in length.

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 could specify the output format more explicitly, but the display_type parameter implies the format (City, StateCode or City, State). It covers input, usage, authentication, rate limits, and error handling. Slightly incomplete on exact response structure but sufficient for an autocomplete tool.

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% with both parameters having descriptions (text and display_type). The description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 tool returns US city suggestions for partial input. It specifies the use case (city-field type-ahead, resolving partial city name) and distinguishes from sibling tools (sthan_autocomplete_address, sthan_autocomplete_zipcode). The verb 'return' is specific and appropriate.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (city-field type-ahead) and when not (street addresses or ZIP codes), with direct references to alternative tools. Also provides context on API key requirement and rate limits.

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