Get Top Ten / Peak Water Levels

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature of the tool. The description adds useful behavioral context: it describes the returned event details (date, height, causal event name, category), notes that heights are relative to a requested datum, and clarifies that peak events can be optionally year-filtered.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose and efficiently covers the two analysis modes, datum relativity, and a use case in three sentences. It is appropriately sized, though the first sentence is dense with nested output details.

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 rich input schema, output schema, and annotations, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly. It explains the key semantic choice between 'toptenwaterlevels' and 'peakwaterlevels' and the typical datum, though it does not differentiate from the similar extreme-water-level sibling.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters in detail. The description reinforces the analysis modes and datum context, but it largely repeats what the schema provides rather than adding new syntax, format, or constraint information.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get a station's highest recorded water levels') and clearly explains the two analysis modes. It distinguishes this from generic water-level tools by emphasizing 'highest recorded' and 'peak' events, but it does not name or contrast with the similar sibling noaa_get_extreme_water_levels.

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 gives a concrete use case ('what's the worst flooding ever recorded at X?') and explains when to use each analysis mode via the analysis parameter. It lacks explicit when-not guidance or direct comparison to alternatives such as noaa_get_extreme_water_levels.

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