get_gp_advisor

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

With no annotations, description carries burden. It discloses output details (matching district, distance, yield, great work slots) but does not mention preconditions (e.g., unit existence), side effects (none expected), or whether it's read-only. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences plus an Args line, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

Tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema. Description covers input source and output details. Could mention edge cases (no available cities) but overall sufficient.

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 0% (no schema descriptions), but the tool description explicitly explains the parameter: 'unit_index: The Great Person unit's index (from get_units output).' This adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only info.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Show best cities' and resource 'Great Person activation', with ranking by suitability. Distinguishes from siblings like get_great_people (lists GPs) and get_settle_advisor (for settling cities).

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?

Description implies usage by explaining the tool's function: listing cities with matching district and details. It provides context (e.g., campuses for scientists) but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use.

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