os_net_rinex_years

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, and the verb 'List' is consistent with a safe, non-destructive operation. However, the description adds no further behavioral context—such as data scope, pagination, or what 'years' represents—so it provides little value beyond the structured annotations.

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 four-word sentence, 'List OS Net RINEX years.' It is appropriately sized, front-loaded, and contains no filler or redundant content.

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?

For a simple, parameterless list operation with an output schema and read-only annotations, the one-line description is mostly sufficient. It could clarify that these are years with available RINEX data, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, this is a minor omission.

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 schema contains only a fixed const parameter 'tool' with no description and no required user arguments. Since the effective parameter surface is empty, the description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the 0% schema description coverage is not a meaningful gap.

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 the verb 'List' with the specific resource 'OS Net RINEX years', clearly stating a read-only enumeration operation. No sibling tool name overlaps with this exact function, so the purpose is unambiguous and distinguishable from tools like os_net_station_get or os_net_station_log.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as os_net_station_get or os_net_station_log. It does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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