Get current air quality for an Italian city, with European Air Quality Index and PM10/PM2.5 levels, to see if smog or pollution is present and whether running outdoors is safe.
Qualita dell'aria in una localita italiana, con indice europeo, polveri sottili PM10 e PM2.5. Usalo quando l'utente chiede com'e' l'aria, se c'e' smog o se puo' andare a correre.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| citta | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose useful behavioral facts: only Italian locations are covered and the output contains an air-quality index with PM10/PM2.5. It does not mention update frequency, units, or behavior for unknown cities, so transparency is only partial.
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 tight sentences: the first states output and scope, the second states when to use it. No filler.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, output content, scope, and usage triggers. Minor gaps like units and error handling do not prevent correct invocation.
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 coverage is 0%, and the description only indirectly explains 'citta' by saying 'in una localita italiana'. That adds the key semantic constraint, but no format, examples, or explicit mapping from description to parameter.
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 states the resource ('Qualita dell'aria in una localita italiana') and the specific data included (European index, PM10, PM2.5). It is clearly distinct from weather, news, alerts, and reminder siblings.
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?
It gives explicit usage triggers: user asks about air quality, smog, or whether they can go running. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, though those can be inferred from sibling names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.