Get Outages

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

The description adds critical behavioral context beyond the annotations: 'Empty results may indicate no outages or upstream unavailability' prevents misinterpretation of empty responses. It also specifies units (MW) and timezone (America/Edmonton), which are not in the annotations. The description aligns with the readOnly/idempotent/openWorld hints.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a purpose: function, data format, and caveat. The description is front-loaded with the core behavior and contains no fluff.

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 tool has an output schema, so return-value details are covered elsewhere. The description addresses interval bounds, units, timezone, and empty-result meaning, which are the main contextual ambiguities. It does not explain pagination or error handling, but those are less critical for a read-only data-fetch 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?

The input schema already describes start and end with full detail, including inclusivity and timezone handling. The description does not add new parameter semantics; it only reinforces the interval and provides output units. With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal value for parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and identifies the resource ('AESO generator outage observations') and interval ('[start, end)'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools that handle prices, load, or generation data.

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 the tool is for outage data by naming the resource, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer it over siblings or name any alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tools are provided, so usage context is only implicit.

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