Air AQI check

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

Annotations already provide readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive hints, so the description carries low burden. It adds that the response is intentionally minimal ('just the AQI number + band'), which is useful behavioral context. No contradictions.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the output and the typical use case with no fluff. Every word serves a purpose.

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 has one required parameter? Actually zero required parameters (both optional), no output schema, and simple structure. The description adequately conveys the minimal response but omits how locationId is determined or passed, and it doesn't describe privacy_mode behavior. Given the simplicity, this is moderately complete but has notable gaps in parameter usage.

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 only 50% (locationId lacks a description), and the tool description does not mention either parameter. The description's phrase 'configured location' hints at locationId but doesn't explain its format or usage. The schema covers privacy_mode, but the description fails to compensate for the uncovered locationId, so it edges toward a lower score.

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 the tool returns just the AQI number and band for the configured location, which is a clear verb-plus-resource statement. It implies a streamlined, fast result but does not explicitly name or contrast with sibling tools like air_health_bands or air_current_reading, though the 'just' phrasing hints at a lean scope.

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?

It gives a direct use case: 'is the air OK to go outside?' prompts, which tells an agent when to invoke this tool. It doesn't mention when not to use it or point to alternatives, but the use case is specific and actionable.

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