space.exoplanet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral transparency burden. It mentions data source, update frequency, and return fields, but lacks details on rate limits, pagination, default behavior (limit=20 is in schema but not description), and whether it's read-only. More transparency would be beneficial.

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 sentences, front-loaded with key information (source and scope), then filters and returns. No verbose or redundant content.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a complete overview: what the tool does, what you can filter by, and what you get back. It lacks mention of pagination, sorting, or error handling, but is adequate for a query tool with few parameters.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It lists the filterable parameters (name, hostStar, discoveryYear, method) and indicates return fields, adding meaning beyond the schema types. However, it does not explain accepted values for method or other constraints.

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 confirmed exoplanets from a specific authoritative source (NASA Exoplanet Archive), with scope (~6k, weekly updated). It differentiates from sibling space tools by focusing on exoplanets specifically.

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 indicates when to use the tool (to access exoplanet data) and lists filterable fields, implying query scenarios. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives like space.system or space.body for related searches.

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