不動産マクロスナップショット

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which the description confirms by describing a read-only data aggregation. The description adds context about external data dependencies (e-Stat key requirement, FRED CSV without key), which is valuable beyond 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, with two sentences in English and Japanese. The Japanese may be redundant for an English-language tool, but it is still front-loaded and efficient.

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?

While the description covers the tool's scope and dependencies, it lacks details on output format (e.g., returns a dashboard or data table). Given no output schema, a brief hint about return structure would be beneficial.

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%, and the description adds meaning: it explains prefecture format, area as optional filter, and includeExternalSeries with note about required keys. This fully clarifies parameter usage.

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 it provides a one-screen macro view covering land price YoY, transaction counts, population decline, and optional external data. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like drill_down_local_analysis or forecast_land_price_trend, which are more focused.

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 explains when to use this tool (macro overview) and mentions optional external series needing ESTAT_APP_ID. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context of sibling tools implies it's for high-level snapshots.

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