noaa_stations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not burdened with safety disclosure. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., pagination, result format, rate limits), but it does not contradict annotations either.

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, followed by a concrete usage example. Every sentence adds value, and there is no unnecessary filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is a simple search with three optional params and no output schema. The description covers the search intent but does not describe return values or clarify that at least one filter (location or dataset) may be needed. Annotations and schema cover safety and params, but the missing output schema leaves some ambiguity.

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%, already documenting all three parameters. The description's location ID examples are redundant with the location_id schema description, adding no new semantic information beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Search') and resource ('NOAA weather stations'), with specific examples of location IDs. It distinguishes from siblings like noaa_locations and noaa_datasets, but does not explicitly distinguish from other station search tools (e.g., nws_stations, coops_stations).

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 usage examples for location_id format (FIPS:36, CITY:US360019), implying how to use the tool. However, it does not offer explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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