get_air_quality

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 discloses the core function but omits details such as data source, response format, rate limits, or behavior on invalid locations. The term 'current' is left undefined.

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 extremely concise, with the purpose stated in one sentence and parameter details in a compact Args block. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

For a tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It explains the input but does not describe the output structure (e.g., what pollutants are included, AQI scale, or categories), leaving some gap for agent expectations.

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 schema provides only a type for 'location' with 0% description coverage. The description adds meaningful semantic guidance: 'City name, optionally "City,CountryCode"' clarifies the expected format. This compensates well for the sparse 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get current air quality index (AQI) and pollutant breakdown for a location.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and names the resource (AQI and pollutants), which distinguishes it from sibling weather tools.

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 implies usage for air quality queries but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like get_current_weather or get_weather_forecast. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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