Get a service area

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. Description adds that it returns geometry metadata but does not detail other behavioral aspects. With annotations covering safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, no redundancy. First sentence states purpose, second adds detail about return value and usage. Efficient and well-structured.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description adequately explains return fields (name, geometry metadata) and use case (territory-aware dispatch). Sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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% with description 'Service Area ID'. Description mentions 'UUID' and 'reference its UUID', adding slight context beyond schema. However, this is minimal enhancement over baseline 3.

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 specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'service area', explaining it returns a geographic coverage zone with name and geometry metadata. It distinguishes from 'listServiceAreas' by targeting a single record via ID.

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 context for use: referencing the UUID as `service_area_id` on customer records for territory-aware dispatch. While not explicitly stating when not to use, the sibling 'listServiceAreas' implies alternative for listing.

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