usace_timeseries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. The description adds the naming format and prerequisite, but does not disclose response format, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. With annotations covering safety, the added value is moderate but not rich.

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 compact sentences: the purpose is front-loaded, followed by the essential naming format and a cross-tool pointer. No filler or redundant words; every sentence earns its place.

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 description covers the core purpose, naming convention, and required upstream tool. It lacks explicit return format or default behavior, but given the absence of an output schema and the presence of good annotations, this is reasonably complete for a data retrieval tool.

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%, with each parameter individually documented (e.g., name example 'Keys.Flow.Inst.1Hour.0.Ccp-Rev', begin/end ISO 8601 formats). The description adds the overarching naming pattern but does not provide param-specific semantics beyond what the schema already gives, so it meets the baseline.

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 specific verb 'Get' and identifies resource as 'USACE time-series data' with data types (water level, flow, storage, precipitation). It explains the naming format and references usace_locations, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tool usace_levels, so it lacks full differentiation.

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?

Provides a clear prerequisite: 'Use usace_locations first to find location names.' This tells the agent when to use the tool (after obtaining location names) and gives a workflow hint. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives like usace_levels, so no explicit exclusions are given.

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