tides.now

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic function but omits important details such as whether the operation is read-only, what happens if no station is found, data freshness, or any required authentication. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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 very concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it sacrifices essential details (like parameter usage) that an agent needs. It earns a middle score because it is efficient but not sufficiently informative.

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 the tool has 4 parameters with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is far too minimal. It fails to explain how to use the tool, what the output looks like, or any edge cases. The agent would have insufficient information to use the tool 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?

The input schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no additional meaning for any parameter. The agent receives no clues about the purpose of lat, lon, hours, or radius_km beyond their names and types. This is a critical gap for correct invocation.

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's function: 'NOAA tide predictions for the nearest tide station to a coordinate.' It specifies the verb (predictions), resource (tide stations), source (NOAA), and method (nearest to coordinate). There are no sibling tide tools, so it stands alone as a distinct resource.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of conditions, limitations, or exclusions. The agent receives no context about appropriate use cases or when to prefer another tool.

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