get_spacetrack_cdm

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

Without annotations, the description discloses that the tool returns raw CDM records as dicts and requires environment variables. It does not mention rate limits or error behavior, but the core behavior is adequately conveyed.

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 concise, using a docstring format with clear Args. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the total length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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 key aspects: data type (dicts), filtering requirement, environment variables, and parameter constraints. Without an output schema, it still provides useful return info. Minor missing details like pagination or error handling, but overall complete enough.

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?

Each parameter is explained: norad_cat_id as NORAD catalog number for SAT_1_ID/SAT_2_ID, epoch_range as ISO datetime range with TCA filtering, limit as max records. This adds meaning beyond the schema's null types, especially given 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Query conjunction data messages (CDM) from SpaceTrack,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_spacetrack_gp and query_spacetrack by targeting CDM.

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 explicitly requires at least one filter parameter and mentions needed environment variables. However, it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives like query_spacetrack, though the CDM focus implies differentiation.

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