nightlights_timeseries

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'monthly radiance trends' but omits details like data source (VIIRS), update frequency, output format, or limitations. The schema indirectly reveals start year minimum 2012, but the description does not elaborate on behavioral traits beyond a high-level purpose.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. Every word serves a function, with no redundancy.

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?

The description is incomplete for a tool without an output schema. It does not describe what the tool returns (e.g., an array of monthly values), the data source, or any constraints. Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, point-based time series), more detail is needed to be self-sufficient.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific insight beyond the schema; it does not clarify the role of lat/lng or start/end year in generating the time series.

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 'Night light time series analysis — monthly radiance trends' for monitoring urbanization or conflict, using a specific verb ('analysis') and resource ('night light time series'), distinguishing it from siblings like nightlights_anomaly or nightlights_compare.

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 usage for monitoring urbanization or conflict but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over other nightlight tools (e.g., nightlights_anomaly) or provide any restrictions or alternatives. Usage is derived from context, not direct guidance.

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