Solar system details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description only needs to add domain context — and it does, notably the data-freshness window (kills and jumps "in the last hour") and the K-space vs J-space response split. It omits what happens for an unknown system name or whether the lookup is cached/live.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its payload, then branching to the J-space case. The field enumeration is dense but each clause maps to a real returned field, with no filler.

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 no output schema, the description must outline the return shape, and it does so for both normal and wormhole systems. It is slightly thin on edge cases (invalid/ambiguous system names, the role of the optional character param), but broadly sufficient to call correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with clear field descriptions and one required param, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description's note about 'current' merely repeats the schema's own wording for `system` and adds nothing about the `character` parameter.

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?

Names the resource (a solar system) and enumerates the exact data returned: security, constellation/region, NPC stations, gate neighbours, sovereignty, activity stats, trade-hub distances, plus a distinct J-space branch. Nothing in the sibling list (lookup, route_plan, killmails, wormhole_type) returns this bundle, so an agent can separate it without opening the schema.

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 only routing guidance is "Use 'current' for the character's location", which is a parameter hint rather than a when-to-use rule. It never says when to prefer this over lookup, route_plan or killmails, so usage is implied by the content list rather than stated.

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