get_interconnection_queue

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral context: the tool returns total generation capacity from each ISO's public queue, with additional large-load data only for ERCOT, and explains provenance and sources. It doesn't contradict annotations. Slightly incomplete on auth/rate limits but annotations cover safety.

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 relatively concise given the information conveyed, with front-loaded main purpose. A few extra details (e.g., specific numbers) could be considered slightly verbose, 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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains the fields returned (queued_load_total_gw, queued_load_data_center_gw, top_subregions) and their meaning, including the special ERCOT case. Sources are cited. Complete for an ISO-level queue snapshot tool.

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 one parameter (iso). Description adds meaning: lists valid ISO values (ERCOT, PJM, etc.), explains that omitting it returns all-ISO snapshot, and implies the drill-down behavior. This goes beyond the basic schema description.

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 it provides an ISO interconnection queue snapshot with total queued generation capacity and ERCOT-specific large load data. It names specific resources (queued_load_total_gw, queued_load_data_center_gw) and distinguishes from sibling tools 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 -> use get_grid_intelligence; forward-looking emergence -> use grid_transition_radar). Also provides guidance on how to use (pass iso for drill down, omit for all-ISO snapshot).

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