cdec_sensor_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful domain context (sensor meanings, station examples) but does not disclose return format, pagination, or historical data behavior. No contradiction with 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 front-loaded with the purpose and then provides compact, well-organized reference lists. Every line adds value, with no fluff or redundant restatement of schema fields.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries some burden to explain what the tool returns. It explains the key domain codes needed for invocation but does not describe the return structure or time-series format. Still, given the tool's simplicity and the schema's coverage, it is adequately complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds additional sensor numbers (30, 2) and more station ID examples (FOL, DNP, NML, BUL) beyond the schema's examples, making parameter selection more informed and accurate.

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 'Get real-time sensor data from California Data Exchange Center (CDEC) monitoring stations,' identifying the specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cdec_stations by focusing on sensor readings rather than station metadata.

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?

Provides clear context by listing common sensor numbers and station IDs, helping the agent know what values to use. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives or any exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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