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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the external API dependency and filtering by magnitude, implying a read-only query. It does not explain response format, error behavior, or rate limits, but for a simple API query this is adequate. No contradictions with annotations (none exist).

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?

Single clear sentence with no filler. Front-loaded action verb 'Queries' immediately conveys purpose. No unnecessary information.

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 low-complexity tool (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is acceptable but lacks detail on time range of 'recent' and response format. It does not fully prepare an agent for all invocation scenarios.

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% (min_magnitude described). The description reiterates 'minimum magnitude' without adding new meaning (e.g., units, allowed range, or typical values). It adds minimal value beyond the schema, meeting baseline expectations.

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 queries the USGS Earthquake Hazards API for recent earthquakes with a minimum magnitude. It specifies the data source and primary filter, distinguishing it from siblings which cover other domains (e.g., weather, finance). However, 'recent' is vague—could specify a default time window.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, exclusions, or context provided. The description merely states functionality without helping the agent decide between similar data-fetching tools like getWeatherAnomaly or getPollenCount.

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