get_asteroid_details

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

No annotations provided; description describes the output but lacks details on rate limits, auth requirements, or side effects. For a read-only tool, it is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences plus args, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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's simplicity (1 param, no output schema), description is complete enough. It tells what it does, what it returns, and the parameter meaning. Could mention output format but not critical.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explains the parameter 'asteroid_id' as NEO reference ID with an example, adding meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Detailed information about a specific asteroid' and lists what it shows (orbital parameters, close approaches, physical data). Differentiated from siblings like 'get_near_earth_objects' which lists NEOs.

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?

Implied usage for a single asteroid's details, but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives mentioned. Could be improved by stating not to use for list queries.

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