hhhot

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the request format, optional parameters, and response structure, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, safe, or any rate limits. The behavioral traits are incomplete for a data retrieval tool.

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 well-organized with sections for parameters, example, and response. It is front-loaded with purpose and uses bullet points effectively. The inclusion of both JSON and CSV response keys is slightly redundant since only JSON is supported, but overall not overly verbose.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains all 6 parameters, provides valid values, a concrete request example, and details the response structure. It covers the tool's purpose, usage, and output comprehensively.

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 schema has 100% coverage with basic parameter descriptions, but the description adds significant value by listing all valid station codes, year range, and providing a request example. It also clarifies that rformat defaults to 'json' and that month/day/hour are optional, enriching the schema 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 states the tool retrieves Hourly Heights of Astronomical Tides (HHOT) for a given station and year, with optional month/day/hour filtering. It specifies the resource (tide data) and action (API request), and is distinct from sibling tools like climate or earthquake data.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (to get tide heights) and how to specify parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to sibling tools, which could help avoid confusion with similar data tools.

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