sentinel_coverage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states the tool's function without addressing any behavioral traits such as input constraints, output format, or operational limits (e.g., coordinate system, revisit frequency). This is minimal disclosure for a tool that likely queries external data.

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 concise sentence that communicates the core purpose without waste. It is front-loaded but lacks any structural elements like bullet points or separated sections, which are not critical for a simple tool.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, usage constraints, or example use cases. The minimal description leaves the agent guessing about what information is returned and how to interpret it.

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% as both lat and lng have descriptions in the schema. The description adds only 'for a location', which is already implicit from lat/lng. No additional semantic value beyond the schema is provided, so a baseline score of 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 it provides Sentinel-2 coverage and revisit information for a location, specifying both the resource (Sentinel-2) and the type of data. It is distinct from sibling tools like sentinel_latest or sentinel_search, though it does not elaborate on the exact scope of 'coverage and revisit information'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sentinel_search or sentinel_latest. The agent must infer its purpose from the name and minimal description, which is insufficient for effective selection among many sibling tools.

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