Real-time population & congestion

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently describes the operation as a query ("조회합니다") and lists the returned data types: real-time population, congestion level, demographics, and optional forecast. It does not mention limitations like stale data or error behavior, but for a read-only lookup, this is reasonably complete.

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 compact: two sentences (one English, one Korean) plus a usage example. It front-loads the core purpose, includes a bilingual summary, and gives a concrete user query example—all without fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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 sufficiently explains what the tool returns (population, congestion, demographics, forecast). It also clarifies the optional forecasting behavior. However, it does not explain return format, error handling, or the need for a validated place (though that is in the schema). For a simple 2-param read tool, it is mostly complete.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions for 'place' (recommending search_place) and 'includeForecast' (default false). The tool description adds further context that the forecast is a '12-hour AI forecast', enhancing understanding beyond the raw schema. This exceeds the baseline for high 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 clearly states what the tool does: 'Get real-time population, congestion level (여유/보통/약간 붐빔/붐빔), demographics, and optional 12-hour AI forecast for a Seoul hotspot.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_living_population and get_city_snapshot by focusing on hotspot congestion with demographic data.

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 when-to-use context with the Korean query example ("지금 강남역 혼잡해?" 류 질문에 사용) and recommends using search_place to confirm the place name. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, so it lacks complete when-not-to-use guidance.

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