coops_stations

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already discloses the safe read-only nature. The description adds that filtering by type and state is optional, which is useful, but does not elaborate on return format, pagination, or default behavior when no filters are provided. This is adequate for a simple list tool but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence quickly explains optional filters. It avoids redundant detail and every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 list/search tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. The only gap is that it doesn't clarify what 'search' means beyond filtering (e.g., by name), but this is a minor omission given the tool's simplicity and the annotations.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('type' and 'state'), so the description adds little extra information beyond what the schema already conveys. The description repeats the parameter meanings but does not introduce new semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: 'List/search NOAA CO-OPS stations.' It specifies the resource (NOAA CO-OPS stations) and the verb (list/search), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like coops_water_level and coops_tide_predictions which retrieve specific data types 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?

The description provides clear context on when to use this tool: to list/search stations, with optional filters by type and state. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear for an agent to select it over sibling tools that serve different purposes.

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