swpc_sunspots

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already establishes the read-only nature. The description adds useful context about monthly granularity and the solar-cycle relationship, but it does not disclose return format, historical date range, or data source. No contradiction exists between the description and 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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no redundant or filler content. Every sentence adds value.

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, read-only data retrieval tool, the description is mostly complete: it states what is returned and why it matters. However, with no output schema present, it could further clarify the return shape, units, or date coverage to be fully self-sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds the key semantic detail that the data is monthly, which clarifies the returned series, even though there are no parameters to document.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get monthly sunspot numbers.' It clearly identifies what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool swpc_solar_cycle, and the phrase 'Tracks the ~11-year solar cycle' could blur the boundary between the two.

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 use: monthly sunspot numbers track the solar cycle and correlate with solar activity and space weather events. It does not mention exclusions or name alternative SWPC tools, but the intended use case is reasonably clear.

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