propagate_keplerian

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions analytical dynamics and the input/output units but does not disclose limitations, error conditions, or non-destructive nature. Lacks explicit safety or performance context.

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 well-structured with a one-sentence summary, initialization guidance, and a parameter list. It is front-loaded but slightly lengthy; could be more concise without losing clarity.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, no output schema), the description covers input options, output frames, and angle formats. It does not explain the return value shape, but otherwise provides sufficient context for correct use.

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 0%, but the description provides detailed parameter explanations, including units (meters, m/s) and angle formats. It adds meaning beyond the bare schema, compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 specifies 'Propagate a satellite orbit using two-body (Keplerian) analytical dynamics,' clearly stating the verb (propagate), resource (satellite orbit), and method (two-body Keplerian). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like propagate_numerical and propagate_sgp4.

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 explains initialization options (ECI state or Keplerian elements) and output choices (single epoch or range). It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the method name and sibling tools imply it's for unperturbed two-body propagation.

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