coops_tide_predictions

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds some behavioral details like date format and shortcut usage, but it does not describe return value format, pagination, rate limits, or any other operational caveats. No contradictions 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence earns its place. It is concise and well-structured with no 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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, this description gives a solid quick-start: core inputs, date format, and interval options. It does not mention time zone or datum defaults, but those are documented in the schema enums. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying the date range format (YYYYMMDD) and how the date shortcut is an alternative to begin_date/end_date, plus the practical meaning of interval='hilo'. This helpful cross-parameter guidance merits a 4.

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 verb and resource: 'Get tide predictions for a NOAA CO-OPS station.' It distinguishes from many sibling tools by focusing on tide predictions, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the closely related coops_high_low tool, which also deals with high/low tides.

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 input requirements (station ID + date range or date shortcut) and a tip for using interval='hilo'. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like coops_high_low or coops_water_level, nor does it give exclusions or alternative tool names.

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