get_swath_report

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

The description discloses cost structure (1 credit per property +25/fresh-fetched record with 10-minute cache) and output details (exposure.hail_in, exposure.score). This adds significant value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, making the tool's behavior fully transparent.

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 two sentences long and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence earns its place, providing purpose, output details, and usage guidance without redundancy.

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 tool's moderate complexity (11 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the output structure and cost but leaves many optional input parameters unexplained. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent to use all features correctly.

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 only 9% schema description coverage, the description does not explain the 10 undocumented parameters like limit, offset, roof_material, etc. The output fields are mentioned, but input filter semantics are missing, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 that the tool returns every property inside a storm swath with hail size scores (exposure.hail_in, exposure.score 0-1). This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like find_storms (which finds storms, not properties) and get_report_quote (which previews costs).

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 mentions billing details and suggests previewing with get_report_quote, providing a clear alternative for cost estimation. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other property-lookup tools like lookup_property, leaving some ambiguity.

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