ebird_recent_observations

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention that an API key is required (despite being in the schema), whether the tool is read-only, rate limits, or error handling. The description is too vague to inform an agent of the tool's behavior.

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 a single sentence, which is concise but omits essential details. It is underspecified for a 4-parameter tool with no output schema, making it not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and only 50% schema description coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the response format, authentication, parameter constraints (e.g., maxResults), or how to specify a region correctly.

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 50% (regionCode and back have descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. While the schema itself includes examples (e.g., 'AU-VIC'), the description does not clarify maxResults or api_key, leaving ambiguity.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'recent bird observations from eBird', but does not differentiate from sibling tools like ebird_notable_observations or ebird_species_info, nor does it specify what 'recent' means or the required region parameter.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ebird_notable_observations). No context on prerequisites, region selection, or intended use cases is given.

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