get_area_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully discloses behavior: it resolves location to a PSA code, composes multi-source data, and adds derived context. The description is transparent and comprehensive for a read-only tool.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by composition details and added value. No unnecessary words.

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 output schema exists (not shown but context confirms), the description adequately covers what the tool does without needing to detail return values. It explains input handling, data composition, and derived context.

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% (one parameter with description). The description adds value by stating the location is 'resolved to PSA Standard Geographic Code', which provides context beyond the schema's 'location' description.

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 is a one-call civic profile for Philippine locations, listing specific data categories (demographics, economy, hazard risk, weather) and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it replaces eight separate calls.

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 implies usage when a composite profile is needed rather than individual calls, and contrasts with alternatives by mentioning 'instead of eight'. However, it does not explicitly state when to use individual siblings or provide exclusion criteria.

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