get_radar_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the download size (~5-15 MB) and expected delay on first call, along with the specific metadata fields returned. It does not mention error cases or permissions, but for a read-only metadata tool these are less critical.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and efficiently provides details on what is returned and a performance note. No redundant 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the return values are covered. The description adequately explains the tool's scope, data included, and a performance caveat. It does not address potential errors like missing radar coverage, but overall is sufficiently complete for a simple metadata retrieval tool.

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?

The input schema has two required parameters (lat, lon) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain these parameters further, but they are standard coordinates and their purpose is clear from context. Minimal added value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the latest NEXRAD Level 2 volume metadata from the nearest radar, specifying it is metadata only and listing the data fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_active_warnings or get_mrms_severe by focusing on radar metadata.

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 informs that the tool returns metadata only (no imagery) and mentions the download size and time cost. This indirectly guides users to not use it if they need imagery, but lacks explicit comparison to alternative tools.

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