env_nabel_current

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, etc.), description adds critical behavior: it returns metadata and download links, not real-time raw values, and specifies output contents (station info, parameters, data links, limit context). No contradiction 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?

Concise yet comprehensive: one sentence summary, then structured details, use case, and important notes. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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 low parameter count and existence of output schema, description sufficiently covers return type (station info, parameters, data links, limit context) and the tool's scope. No omissions noted.

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?

The single parameter (station) is explained with examples in both the description and schema description. Important notes add context on how to obtain station codes, significantly aiding parameter understanding.

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 it retrieves current and historical air quality data for a specific NABEL station, listing measured parameters. It distinguishes from sibling tools like env_nabel_stations and env_air_limits_check by focusing on data access for a single station.

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?

Explicit use case (current air quality / data access) and important notes (returns metadata and data links, not real-time raw values; station codes from env_nabel_stations) provide clear when-to-use and how-to-prequisites, with alternative tool mentioned.

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