Get Air Quality

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It provides no information about side effects, constraints, rate limits, or what data is returned (e.g., AQI, pollutants). The tool is essentially a black box beyond its name.

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 a single, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the key action.

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 tool with no output schema, the description should hint at what information is returned (e.g., air quality index, specific pollutants). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's output beyond 'air quality information'.

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% (one parameter 'city' with description 'The city name'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 'Get air quality information for a city' clearly states the action (get) and resource (air quality information) with context (city). It distinguishes from sibling tools like getCurrentWeather and getForecast, which focus on weather rather than air quality.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. siblings. The description does not mention alternatives like getCurrentWeather for weather data or specify any prerequisites or context for when air quality should be retrieved.

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