air_quality_rank

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a return type (pandas.DataFrame) and the source URL, but it does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness, or sorting behavior beyond what the URL implies.

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 front-loaded with the resource name and then gives parameter and return details efficiently. The long raw URL with query parameters is somewhat bulky, but it provides a concrete source and example. Overall it is reasonably concise for a one-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?

For a simple one-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description supplies the source, parameter value mappings, and return type. It omits return columns, sorting order, and data recency, but it is otherwise complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, so the description carries the full burden. It does so well by mapping four concrete date value patterns (empty, 20200312, 202003, 2019) to their meanings: current, daily, monthly, and yearly AQI rankings. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 resource: a 168-city AQI ranking from 真气网. The purpose is clear for an agent, but the description does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as air_quality_watch_point or air_quality_hist, leaving the distinction to be inferred from the tool name and resource scope.

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 what different date strings retrieve, but it gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling air-quality tools or any other alternatives. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or contextual triggers for selection.

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