agriculture-mcp-server

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

Discloses data source (NASA POWER), specific time range (2001-2020), and return content (monthly averages for four metrics) despite having no annotations to rely on.

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?

Well-structured with clear separation between general description and Args section; every sentence conveys essential information without redundancy.

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?

Appropriately complete for a simple 2-parameter tool; explains return values (necessary due to missing output schema) and covers data provenance and ideal use case.

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?

Compensates effectively for 0% schema description coverage by providing German translations and semantic meaning for lat/lon parameters in the Args section.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves long-term climate averages (2001-2020) from NASA POWER for temperature, precipitation, solar radiation and soil moisture, implicitly distinguishing it from the sibling 'climate_history' through the specific averaging period.

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?

Provides a specific use case ('Ideal für Standortbewertung für neue Anbauflächen') but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this over 'climate_history' or other siblings.

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