get_epic_dates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does without mentioning any behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format might be. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient to inform the agent about how the tool behaves.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The additional 'Args' section is brief and relevant. There is no wasted text, making it efficient to read, though it could benefit from more structured guidance.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover behavioral aspects, usage context, or detailed parameter meanings. For a tool with no structured data support, the description should provide more comprehensive information to guide the agent effectively.

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 adds some parameter semantics by listing the 'collection' options ('natural', 'enhanced'), which is not covered in the input schema (0% schema description coverage). However, it does not explain what these options mean or how they affect the results. With one parameter and low schema coverage, the description provides basic but incomplete compensation.

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 purpose: 'Get available dates for EPIC images.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('available dates for EPIC images'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'get_epic_imagery' or 'get_epic_imagery_by_date', which might handle related but different functionality.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the 'collection' parameter options but does not explain when to choose 'natural' vs 'enhanced', nor does it reference sibling tools like 'get_epic_imagery' for context. This lack of usage context leaves the agent without clear direction.

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