query_ctd

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the output behavior (compact summaries vs points), which is useful, but doesn't disclose rate limits, refresh semantics, pagination/limit behavior, or any side effects. The 12-parameter tool with zero annotation coverage needs more behavioral disclosure.

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 extremely short (one sentence), which is concise, but it's under-specified rather than efficiently written. It front-loads the core purpose but omits critical details that would earn additional sentences.

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?

With 12 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and a large sibling set, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain return format beyond 'compact cast summaries', parameter combinations that make sense, or how it differs from list_casts. An output schema exists but the description should still clarify query semantics.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for 12 undocumented parameters. It provides no param semantics at all—only the include_points flag behavior is mentioned. Parameters like max_distance_km, refresh, cruise_type, and variable semantics remain entirely unexplained.

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 states 'Batch CTD query. Returns compact cast summaries unless include_points is true.' It identifies the verb (query) and resource (CTD), distinguishing it as a batch operation. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like list_casts or get_cast_profile, which could overlap in purpose for an agent.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this vs list_casts, get_cast_profile, or other siblings. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or when to choose alternatives. The batch vs single-cast distinction is implied but not stated explicitly.

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