get_historical_storm_reports

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses data source (preliminary NWS/spotter via Iowa Environmental Mesonet), coverage start (~2005), preliminary nature vs. final NCEI record, and output structure (normalized reports with summary).

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 concise, front-loaded with purpose, and organized logically: purpose, specifics, output, caveats, alternatives. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool has an output schema (reducing need to describe returns), the description sufficiently covers usage, parameters, data caveats, and alternatives. It is complete for agent decision-making.

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%, but description adds meaning for date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and output structure related to parameters. However, it does not explain lat/lon format or radius_km semantics beyond default, leaving some gaps.

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 states it retrieves local storm reports for a past date near a CONUS point, specifying it answers about hail, wind, or tornado. It distinguishes from the sibling tool get_storm_reports, which is for current situations.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use (past dates) and when not to (current situation), directing to the alternative get_storm_reports. This is clear guidance for agent selection.

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