inpe_collections

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that authentication is not required and gives the default and maximum result count, but says nothing about output shape, ordering, or whether results can be paginated.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage examples and a compact Args section. No filler, though the example lines could have been folded into a clearer when-to-use statement.

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, no-auth list endpoint with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, auth, and parameter bounds. It would be stronger if it sketched the returned collection fields or noted whether the list is static.

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 0% for the single limit parameter, so the description must compensate; it documents both default (30) and maximum (100), which the schema does not, adding genuine meaning beyond the raw integer type.

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 and resource: returns the list of INPE satellite data collections, and notes it needs no authentication. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling inpe_search tool, which is the most likely confusion point.

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 example phrases ('Brazilian satellite data', 'CBERS collections') give a sense of the intended use, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this instead of inpe_search or how the two relate.

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