UK Crime Outcomes at Location

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent, and open world hints. The description adds the OGL v3.0 license and purpose, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, data freshness, or coordinate constraints beyond what is implied by the name.

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 very concise, consisting of one sentence plus a brief use-case note and license. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could include a bit more structure without adding much length.

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 presence of output schema and full parameter descriptions in the schema, the description provides adequate high-level context. It mentions UK coordinates, month, and use case. Minor gap: no explicit mention of data source or coordinate system, but these are implied.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters (lat, lng, date, limit), so the description adds no additional meaning. Baseline score of 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 it returns case outcomes (charged, acquitted, action taken) for crimes at a UK coordinate in a given month. It provides specific examples and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gov.ukpolice.crimes_near by focusing on outcomes rather than just crime reports.

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 'useful for property safety scoring' but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gov.ukpolice.crimes_near or gov.ukpolice.forces. There is no when-not-to-use or context for choosing this over siblings.

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