usgs_earthquake_count

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that it counts without fetching full details, aligning with that. No extra behavioral context (e.g., return format) is provided, but for a simple count tool this is acceptable.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. Front-loaded with action and resource, followed by a practical example. Every word earns its place.

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?

Tool is simple, annotations cover safety, schema covers parameters, and description provides use case. Could mention return value format, but absence of output schema and tool's straightforward nature make this adequate.

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?

Input schema covers all 7 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, but the overall purpose and example guide usage. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'count', resource 'earthquakes', and purpose 'without fetching full details'. Example 'How many M5+ earthquakes occurred in 2024?' solidifies understanding. Distinguishes from sibling tool 'usgs_earthquakes' which fetches details.

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?

Provides a concrete use case for statistics and implies when not to use (when full details needed). Does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the context is clear enough for agents.

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