lte_band_lookup

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 that the tool returns frequencies, duplex mode, and bandwidths, but it does not mention error handling for invalid band numbers, data source freshness, or any side effects. For a simple read-only lookup, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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, consisting of two sentences that efficiently state the purpose and return fields. Every word earns its place; no extraneous 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?

With a single required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers the core purpose and output, but it lacks information on error behavior, output format details, or handling of invalid inputs. For a simple tool, this is sufficient but could be more comprehensive.

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 input schema provides a description for the 'band' parameter ('LTE band number (e.g., 7, 12, 41)') with 100% coverage. The description only reinforces the parameter's role ('by band number') without adding new meaning, such as valid ranges or format expectations. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states the action (look up), resource (LTE band), and input (by band number). It mentions the returned data: frequencies, duplex mode, bandwidths. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lte_bands_list (which lists all bands) and nr_band_lookup (for NR bands).

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It implies usage when you have a specific band number, but it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like lte_bands_list for a full list or frequency_to_band for reverse lookup.

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