demographics

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the data source context, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like data freshness, error handling, or response format. With annotations present, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, well-formed sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. Every word contributes meaning; there is no waste. It is appropriately front-loaded.

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 lack of output schema and minimal schema content, the description omits important details: what demographic indicators are returned, any filtering options, or the format. An agent cannot fully judge the tool's output without more context.

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 single parameter 'slug' has no schema description, and the tool description only mentions 'einer Stadt' (a city) but does not explain what the slug represents or how to obtain it. With 0% schema coverage, the description should provide more detail, but it falls short.

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 provides demographic indicators of a city ('Demografie-Kennzahlen einer Stadt') via a specific data source (GENESIS/Regionalstatistik). It identifies the resource and verb, though it could be more explicit about the exact operation (e.g., 'Get demographic data for a city by slug'). The sibling tools are distinct, so no confusion.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like accidents, air_quality, or other data tools. Without context on use cases (e.g., 'Use for city demographic analysis'), an agent cannot differentiate effectively.

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