GAUGE catalog (free)

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It accurately portrays a read-only listing without side effects, which is sufficient for a catalog tool. No contradictions or misleading statements.

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?

Single sentence with a front-loaded verb and resource, but the long list of categories makes it somewhat verbose. Still efficient for the information conveyed.

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 zero-parameter free catalog tool with no output schema, the description explains what the tool lists and hints at the response content ('entities you can query'). It is complete for its intended simplicity.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on output content.

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 clearly states 'List all GAUGE signals' and enumerates specific categories (hydrology, air quality, etc.), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like gauge_crop_drought by offering a comprehensive overview rather than a specific signal type.

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 use to see available signals before using specific tools, especially with 'Free, no payment' encouraging exploration. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid it or mention alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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