save_site

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral details: it writes one site, is free, builds a persistent shortlist, returns an id, and can be followed by set_site_alert. 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and includes necessary context. It is slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value; the explicit Do NOTs and example are helpful.

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?

Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, prerequisites, return value, follow-up actions, alternatives, and an example. It is fully informative for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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%, so description must compensate. It mentions lat and lon as primary, lists optional parameters (name, state, market, target_mw, notes), and gives a concrete example with values, providing full parameter guidance.

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 saves a candidate data-center site to DC Hub account. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly listing tools not to use (list_saved_sites, export_dataset, score_facility) and provides an example usage.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use (track across sessions, build shortlist) and when-not-to-use (reading, downloading, scoring). It also mentions prerequisite (need a key) and directs to claim_free_key if needed.

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