get_interconnection_queue

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds valuable behavioral context: explains data sources (ERCOT GIS, PJM/MISO/SPP/CAISO/NYISO/ISO-NE queues), field meanings, and that it's a snapshot. No contradictions.

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?

Description is front-loaded with the main purpose. While slightly long, every sentence adds value, covering purpose, usage, data sources, and caveats. Could be broken into shorter sentences, but overall efficient.

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, description explains return fields (queued_load_total_gw, queued_load_data_center_gw, top_subregions) and their context. For a single-parameter tool with optional input, it is thorough and self-contained.

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 0%, but description fully explains the 'iso' parameter, listing examples (ERCOT) and implying a set of 7 ISOs. It describes how the parameter affects output (drill-down effect). Adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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 the tool provides an ISO interconnection queue snapshot with total generation capacity per ISO and unique large-load data for ERCOT. It uses specific verbs like 'returns' and 'drill down', and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_grid_intelligence and grid_transition_radar.

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 (queue-depth site-selection, AI/data-center-load saturation intel) and when not to use (single-site time-to-power, forward-looking emergence), naming alternative tools (get_grid_intelligence, grid_transition_radar). Provides clear context for selection.

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