aavso_query_region

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 implies a read-only lookup but says nothing about authentication, rate limits, result counts, or pagination behavior that would matter for a regional catalog query.

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 with the resource and spatial scope stated immediately. No filler, though it is arguably terse for a six-parameter tool.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal but adequate for a simple cone search whose parameters are fully described in the schema. It leaves output format behavior and the relationship to sibling tools unexplained.

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%, so all six parameters including ra, dec, radius, lang, format, and max_magnitude are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or default details beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Query), resource (AAVSO VSX variable stars), and scope (circular region around coordinates). An agent can tell it apart from most siblings by resource, though it does not explicitly contrast with the closely-related aavso_query_star.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and the obvious alternative, aavso_query_star, is not mentioned. The cone-search intent is only implied by 'circular region around coordinates'.

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