Get ERCOT large loads

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: returns latest rows by default, summary aggregates with summary=true. However, it does not describe the output structure, update frequency, or explicitly state that it is read-only.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and scope, then adding the most relevant usage tip. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple two-parameter getter with no annotations or output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and scope. It lacks detail on the exact fields returned in rows/summary, but is adequate for basic invocation.

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 covers both parameters fully with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra semantic value by pointing to the summary toggle, but no additional syntax or format details.

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 identifies the tool as an ERCOT large-load interconnection queue snapshot, specifying the domain (ERCOT) and content (data centers, crypto, industrial). It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting ERCOT-only and the large-load focus, and mentions the summary option.

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?

Provides context that it is ERCOT-only and explains summary versus row output, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over sibling tools like get_load or get_queue. No exclusions or alternative tool references.

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