Get Well Permits

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

Discloses read-only nature (consistent with annotations) and adds the important constraint 'Requires a paid plan with energy intelligence access'. This provides behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise: three short sentences that cover purpose, usage, and constraints. No wasted words. 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?

Given the tool has only 2 parameters, a rich input schema, and helpful annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, and the paid plan restriction. Does not describe output format or data freshness, but these are implicit for a read-only list tool. Adequate for the complexity.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description mentions optional filtering/aggregation by state or operator, which aligns with parameters but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'get' and resource 'US oil & gas well drilling permit data'. It includes synonyms like 'well permits, new drilling permits, permitting activity, upstream permit trends', which distinguishes it from sibling tools such as opa_get_drilling or opa_get_rig_counts.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the user asks about well permits, new drilling permits, permitting activity, or upstream permit trends'. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternative tools, but the given conditions effectively guide usage.

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