Get Gas Economics

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by disclosing a data-quality withdrawal: the $/MWh layer is no longer returned, gas_to_grid_status carries the reason, and the endpoint previously served physically impossible values. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs to avoid misusing cached or derived numbers.

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The core purpose and parameter call are front-loaded, and the withdrawn-feature warning is clearly separated. It is longer than most tool descriptions, but the extra sentences carry important safety caveats rather than filler; a little trimming of the historical explanation would make it tighter.

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 read-only data lookup with full parameter documentation and an output schema, the definition covers what is returned, what was withdrawn, how to detect it, and which sibling to use instead. No critical information is missing for correct invocation.

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 market and heat_rate_btu_per_kwh. The description only repeats the market=<slug> format with examples and does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Behind-the-meter / gas-fired power inputs for a US data-center market,' enumerating Henry Hub spot, regional basis differential, and delivered industrial + electric gas tariff in $/MMBtu. This precisely identifies what the tool returns and distinguishes it from related data lookups.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it for gas-fired power inputs and gives a direct exclusion with an alternative: 'Do NOT use for the electricity grid fuel mix (use get_grid_data).' It also forbids quoting withdrawn $/MWh values or deriving them silently, which is actionable guidance for an agent.

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