set_city_production

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

Without annotations, the description must reveal behavior. It notes the requirement for target coordinates when producing districts, which adds transparency. However, it does not disclose side effects (e.g., replacing current production), error handling, or authorization needs. The description partially compensates for missing annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. It uses a clear list-like format for parameters and includes a single practical tip. Every sentence adds value 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 complexity of 5 parameters and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all parameters with examples and prerequisites. It is missing details on return value or error states, but the output schema likely fills that gap.

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 0%, so the description fully carries parameter explanation. It clearly specifies the source for city_id, enumerates possible item_type values, gives concrete examples for item_name, and explains when target_x/target_y are required. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose is clearly stated as 'Set what a city should produce.' It is a specific verb+resource combination. While it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'set_city_focus' or 'city_action', the purpose is unambiguous and contextually distinct.

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 a tip to call get_cities first but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'set_city_focus', 'city_action', or purchasing. It lacks explicit context for appropriate usage.

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