nrel_solar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'get' verb is consistent. The description adds context about the data (irradiance, panel potential) but lacks details on limitations (e.g., only U.S., assumptions). No contradictions.

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, two sentences, with the core purpose and output front-loaded. No redundant information.

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 no output schema and simple parameters, the description provides sufficient context: it returns irradiance data and solar panel potential. However, it could specify units or data source for completeness.

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 100% with basic descriptions for lat/lon. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics (e.g., valid ranges, coordinate system) beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 solar energy resource data, specifically monthly and annual solar irradiance, for any U.S. location. It distinguishes from sibling NREL tools (fuel stations, utility rates) by focusing on solar resource assessment.

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 implies usage for U.S. locations and solar panel potential assessment but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. No mention of siblings or when not to use.

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