nasa_earth_imagery

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

No annotations are available, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states a basic action with no mention of rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or output format.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but sacrifices necessary detail. It could be expanded slightly without becoming 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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, multiple related siblings), the description fails to provide a complete picture. It lacks parameter descriptions, return value information, and usage context.

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 0%, yet the description provides no explanation of the five parameters. Terms like 'lat', 'lon', 'date', 'dim', and 'api_key' are left entirely to the agent's inference, which is insufficient.

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 the resource 'NASA Earth satellite imagery', which is specific enough to indicate the tool's purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like nasa_epic or nasa_mars_photos, which also deal with Earth or satellite imagery.

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 like nasa_epic. There is no context about prerequisites, coordinate ranges, or date constraints, leaving the agent without direction.

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