atmosphere_air_quality

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns current data and lists pollutants. However, it lacks details on update frequency, data source, or limitations (e.g., API key requirements, availability per location).

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the main action and resource, no unnecessary words. Efficient and scannable.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's function and includes relevant pollutant names. It is complete for this low complexity level.

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 clear descriptions for lat and lng. The description adds no new parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it only confirms the coordinate is used for location. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'current air quality index and pollutant concentrations', listing specific pollutants (PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, CO, Ozone). It distinguishes from siblings like atmosphere_uv and env_air_pollution by focusing on current air quality at a coordinate.

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 implies use for current air quality at a single point but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like env_air_pollution or other environmental tools. No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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