List RIPE Atlas Measurements

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint: true) already indicate safety. The description adds that it returns a paginated list, but does not disclose further behavioral traits beyond the schema and annotations.

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, front-loaded with purpose, and uses a bullet-like list for args. It is concise with no unnecessary words, though slightly long due to parameter count.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately states the return type (paginated list) and covers filters. It is sufficient for effective 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 coverage is 100%, but the description groups and explains parameters in a user-friendly manner (e.g., 'mine: Show only your measurements (requires API key)'), adding value beyond 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 states 'Search and list RIPE Atlas measurements with comprehensive filters,' which uses specific verbs and resource, and clearly distinguishes from siblings like atlas_get_measurement and atlas_measure_ping.

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 when to use (searching with filters) but does not explicitly exclude other tools or mention alternatives. It is clear enough for use, though not explicitly distinguishing.

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