get_dst

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

With no annotations, the description covers some behavioral aspects: data source, provisional status, and usage restrictions. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or behavior for large 'days' values. The disclosure adds value but is not exhaustive.

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 efficient: two paragraphs with no filler. The first paragraph defines the tool's purpose and the Dst scale, while the second covers licensing and attribution. It is front-loaded and each sentence serves a purpose. Slight redundancy in the citation instruction could be trimmed.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional param, output schema exists), the description explains the data's meaning, source, and usage constraints. It provides the Dst interpretation scale. It does not specify error handling or data availability, but the output schema likely covers that.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must clarify the parameter. It states 'over the last `days`' which explains that 'days' specifies the time range. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type and default, though it does not constrain input range or format.

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 the tool returns the hourly Dst index over a specified number of days, explains the Dst scale, and distinguishes itself from siblings by noting the data source (WDC Kyoto) and its non-commercial nature. The verb 'get' and resource 'hourly Dst index' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage for obtaining Dst index data and provides context about licensing and citation, which helps the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives for related indices like Kp or solar wind, leaving some implicit inference to the agent.

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