calculate_ground_track

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

Explicitly describes error handling ('errors returned as formatted strings') and return format (JSON string). Since no annotations provided, the description effectively communicates read-only nature and safety profile.

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?

Structured with Args, Returns, Raises sections. Each sentence serves a purpose; no redundancy or 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?

Covers purpose, parameters, return type, and error behavior. Output schema exists, so return details are sufficient. Could mention typical usage or coordinate format but not essential.

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 0%, but description adds meaning: clarifies orbital_state can be elements or state vector, and provides units for duration and time step. Lacks constraints or examples.

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?

Clear verb 'calculate' and resource 'ground track' from orbital state vectors. Implicitly distinct from sibling tools like 'propagate_orbit_j2' but lacks explicit differentiation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'propagate_orbit_j2' or 'plan_flight'. Description only states what it does, not context.

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