One-call civic profile for a place

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful functional transparency: place resolution to PSA code, composition of six data domains, and derived cross-source context. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 compact paragraphs, front-loaded with a one-line summary. It then details the aggregation scope and derived value without extraneous content. Every sentence contributes to the agent's understanding.

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?

For a complex multi-source aggregator with an output schema, the description covers the full scope of data included and the value of derived normalization. The agent has enough context to invoke correctly without needing to know every output field.

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 100% and the schema already describes the 'location' parameter thoroughly with examples. The description adds no additional parameter-level details beyond mentioning PSA code resolution, which is tool behavior rather than parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('resolves', 'composes') and identifies it as a one-call aggregator for a civic profile. This distinctly differentiates it from the extensive list of single-purpose sibling tools like get_poverty_stats, get_weather_forecast, and assess_area_risk.

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 explicitly says it replaces 'eight' separate calls, providing a clear alternative. It implies use when a comprehensive overview is needed, though it does not explicitly state exclusions (e.g., 'don't use if you need only weather'). The guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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