env_hydro_current

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying that data is updated every 10 minutes and that the response includes a timestamp or fallback link. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured with clear sections, use case and important notes tags, and no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the primary action and efficiently conveys all necessary details.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description covers return format, timestamp, and fallback link. It provides station examples and update frequency, making it complete for a simple data retrieval tool.

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 0%, but the schema itself has a description for station_id. The overall description provides context for both parameters (station_id examples, response_format with defaults). It adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the use case and data freshness.

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 current hydrological measurements from a BAFU station, listing specific parameters (Pegel, Abfluss, Wassertemperatur, 24h-Min/Max) and providing example station IDs. It distinguishes from siblings like env_hydro_history and env_hydro_stations.

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 includes a <use_case> tag specifying when to use (e.g., flood situation check) and notes that data updates every 10 minutes. It mentions getting station ID from env_hydro_stations. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear enough.

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