md_traffic_speeds

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the data content (average speed, traffic volume, lane occupancy) but does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as time ranges, pagination, or output format. It does not contradict 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?

Three sentences, each serving a purpose: the first states the action, the second details the data content, and the third clarifies the use case. No redundancy or 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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully covers what the tool does, what data it returns, and its practical application. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke 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?

With zero parameters, the schema has 100% coverage vacuously, and the description needs to add no parameter-level detail. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description provides enough context about the data returned.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Get speed sensor data from Maryland highways.' It further specifies the data types (average speed, traffic volume, lane occupancy) and clearly distinguishes it from sibling traffic tools like md_traffic_incidents or md_traffic_cameras.

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 for when to use the tool ('Useful for identifying congestion and travel conditions') but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. This meets the 'clear context, no exclusions' tier.

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