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

The description discloses the cost per query, the 20-query session cap, and the dependency on a prior open/fund sequence. However, it does not describe side effects on the session balance, idempotency, failure behavior, or what the response contains. Since annotations provide no safety hints (readOnlyHint false, etc.), the description carries the burden but only partially fulfills it.

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 reasonably compact and front-loads the core purpose. The sequence is clearly presented, and the listing/pricing details are relevant. Some phrasing is tangled ('Buy per-query access to live data listings' followed by 'Listing:...'), but it remains concise overall.

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?

With five parameters, no output schema, and no enums, the description should explain more about how to form a query and what the response looks like. It covers the workflow prerequisites and costs well, but leaves the central query construction and optional receipt parameters underspecified, making the definition incomplete for a correct invocation.

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 only 40%, and the tool description does not compensate. The central 'query' parameter, along with 'k' and 'delivery_receipt', remain unexplained in both the schema and description. The description adds pricing and sequence details but not what the query string should contain or how the optional parameters affect behavior.

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 and schema title indicate this is the paid query step in a data-session workflow. It names a specific resource (live data listings, specifically spaceweather data) and a concrete action (querying after funding), though the opening phrase 'Buy per-query access' could be misread as a purchasing step rather than the act of running a query.

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 gives explicit routing guidance: use data_preview for the free first taste, and use this tool only after data_session_open and data_session_fund, as spelled out in the sequence. It also provides pricing and a per-session query cap, which helps the agent decide whether this tool is applicable.

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