Air Quality

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral context about real-time vs forecast modes, AQI vs raw values, and date constraints, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 paragraph that covers all essential points without excessive verbosity. It front-loads the core purpose and uses clear language, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 7 parameters, no required fields, and no output schema, the description covers the main use cases, modes, and constraints. It could be improved by describing the return format, but overall it's fairly complete.

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 each parameter. The description adds extra semantics such as 'Omit dates for real-time AQI' and 'Provide start_date and end_date for hourly AQI forecast', which aids understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Get air quality data either real-time or forecast' and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'weather_current' by advising to use this tool when standalone or forecast air quality data is needed.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance (over weather_current), parameter usage (omit dates for real-time, provide start_date and end_date for forecast), and constraints (max 6 days, current/future dates only). Also specifies at least one of location, lat+long, or ip is required.

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