coops_air_gap

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. The description adds a helpful definition of air gap but does not disclose behavioral details such as response format, availability per station, or date-handling quirks. Value beyond annotations is minimal.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action verb 'Get', and no wasted words. The definition of air gap is concise and informative.

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, but the description conveys the core purpose and measurement definition. It does not describe the output structure or units, but the schema covers input validation. Adequate for a simple data retrieval tool, though a bit more detail on return shape would strengthen it.

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 100%, with all six parameters individually described. The tool description itself adds no parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully documents 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?

Description clearly states the tool gets air gap (bridge clearance) data from a NOAA CO-OPS station and defines what air gap measures. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling coops_* tools like water level, tides, and currents.

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 context is clear (use for bridge clearance data), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. Given the large number of CO-OPS sibling tools, it would benefit from a note like 'use instead of water level for bridge clearance data.'

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