space.exoplanet

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 mentions the data source (NASA Exoplanet Archive), update frequency (weekly), and approximate record count (~6k). However, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has rate limits, or requires authentication.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the source, filters, and return fields. It is front-loaded with key information, though it could be structured into bullet points for clarity.

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?

The description provides adequate context for a simple query tool: data source, update frequency, filterable parameters, and return fields. Missing details like valid values for 'method' or default ordering, but overall complete given the lack of output schema.

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?

The description mentions four filter parameters (name, hostStar, discoveryYear, method) but omits the 'limit' parameter. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description adds value for the mentioned parameters but is incomplete.

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 it returns confirmed exoplanets from the NASA Exoplanet Archive, with specific filters and return fields. This is distinct from sibling tools like space.body or space.system.

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 lists filter parameters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like space.body or other space-related tools. No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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