stac_queryables

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

The description explains the return format and behavior (e.g., different catalogs support different properties) but does not explicitly mention that the tool is read-only or any side effects. However, the overall behavior is transparent.

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 well-structured with sections for purpose, args, returns, tips, and an example. It is concise and front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

All relevant context is provided: purpose, parameters, return value, usage tips, and an example. No output schema exists, but the description covers the necessary details.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains each parameter: catalog options, collection example, and output_mode formats. This compensates entirely for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'Fetch queryable properties from a STAC API' and explains the return value, distinguishing it from sibling tools like stac_search which handles actual searches.

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 'Tips for LLMs' section explicitly states when to use this tool ('rarely needed', 'useful when debugging') and names stac_search as an alternative, providing clear usage guidance.

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