openaq_air_quality

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the action but does not mention what kind of data is returned (e.g., measurements, indexes), whether pagination exists, rate limits, or any side effects. This is insufficient for safe and effective agent use.

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loaded, but it sacrifices necessary detail. While brevity is a virtue, under-specification reduces effectiveness.

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 an output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, the description is woefully incomplete. An agent cannot determine what to expect as a result or how to interpret the response.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter explanations in the tool description, the agent has no understanding of the meaning or expected values for city, country, parameter, and limit. The description adds zero value to the input schema.

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 'Get air quality data for a location from OpenAQ' clearly indicates the tool's function (retrieve data) and resource (air quality) from a specific source (OpenAQ). It distinguishes from sibling tools like openaq_countries (which lists countries) and openaq_measurements (which likely provides measurements), but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or context. Without sibling comparison or use-case hints, the agent lacks direction for proper invocation.

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