faa_pirep

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only (readOnlyHint=true). The description adds useful context about the types of conditions included (turbulence, icing) and the filtering option, but doesn't discuss rate limits, data source details, or return format beyond that.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded verb, every clause adds info about either the content or the optional filter.

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?

Given the simple one-optional-param read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose, content, and filter option, making it sufficient for an agent.

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 single parameter 'hours' is fully documented in the schema with min/max and description, and the description only reiterates the filtering behavior, adding no additional meaning.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a distinct resource 'pilot reports (PIREPs)', and lists specific content types (turbulence, icing, weather phenomena) that distinguish it from siblings like faa_metar or faa_taf.

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?

Description clearly states what the tool returns and that hours is an optional filter, implying it's for recent PIREPs. However, it doesn't name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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