Dental cost by US city

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It explains that city data is a single observed average per procedure (no min/max), includes state low/high range for context, and notes the data is market research not advice. This adds useful limitations beyond the schema.

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 only 3 sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes an example, data limitation note, and disclaimer. Every sentence earns its place with no waste.

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 adequately explains what is returned (average prices, state range, clinic counts) and the data limitation. It could be more explicit about the output structure, but the example and context are sufficient for a simple 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% for all 3 parameters. The description adds marginal value with an example and mention of state disambiguation, but the schema already describes parameters well. 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 verb 'Get' and resource 'average dental costs and clinic counts for a specific US city', specifying procedures (implants, veneers, braces). It distinguishes from siblings like dental_cost_by_state and dental_national_average by noting it returns city data plus parent state range.

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 provides an example and mentions using the 'state' parameter to disambiguate, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., state-level or national tools). Usage context is implied but lacks direct guidance on exclusions.

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