Stream Transit Alerts

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

The description adds pricing (10 credits, Tier 1) and the HTTP endpoint, which annotations do not convey. However, it is silent on stream behavior itself — whether results arrive as an event stream, how 'next N hours' defaults, or how many hits are emitted — and annotations only say non-read-only, non-idempotent and open-world, which leaves the streaming mechanics unexplained.

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 core statement is front-loaded in one sentence with no filler. The bracketed group/endpoint/cost lines are boilerplate but do carry operationally relevant facts, so they roughly earn their place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary, and the heavy birth-data schema covers required inputs. The remaining gap is behavioral: the delivery format of a 'stream' tool and the default for hours are not stated anywhere.

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%, so the body structure is already documented, and 'next N hours' usefully maps to the nested hours field. But hours and orb carry no schema descriptions, and the description gives no default, unit bounds, or orb meaning, so it adds only minimal semantic lift.

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 single sentence names the resource concretely (natal-transit hits) and the temporal window (next N hours), which is more specific than the name alone. It does not differentiate from close siblings such as astroway_prognostics_transits or astroway_webhooks_transit_trigger, so an agent cannot tell on description alone whether this is a stream endpoint or a one-shot query.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusion, and no mention of alternatives among the many transit-related siblings. The agent is left to infer that the 'Stream' group label and POST endpoint mean this is a streaming variant rather than the plain transit listing.

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