City Overview

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns a catalog of 67 data types with coverage status, a live highlights snapshot, and redirection for uncovered data. It also declares the tool as read-only, consistent 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 concise (~6 sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy, and the structure follows a logical flow: purpose, return components, future growth.

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 there is an output schema (implied by context signals), the description appropriately focuses on the high-level structure (base data, catalog, highlights). It covers the dynamic nature of the catalog and provides enough context for the agent to understand the tool's role without needing full return details.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage for the single parameter 'slug', the baseline applies. The schema already provides clear documentation. The description does not add additional parameter semantics, which is acceptable given the coverage.

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 uses specific verbs ('Get a ONE-CALL overview') and clearly defines the resource ('everything InfraNode knows about a German city'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by positioning itself as the starting point and listing the returned catalog with pointers to other tools.

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 states 'Start here for any city question' and explains that for specific data types, users should call tools like get_city_resource. This provides clear when-to-use and alternatives guidance.

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