check_live_traffic

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions near-real-time refresh from ADS-B receivers, but does not disclose limitations like coverage gaps, latency, or that not all aircraft may be broadcasting. Lacks full transparency for a data-fetching tool.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, return fields, and data source. Each sentence adds value with no redundancy. Front-loaded with clear action verb.

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 3 simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and update nature. It lacks output format details but lists returned fields, making it mostly complete for its complexity.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage; the description adds overall context (e.g., 'near a location') but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 checks live ADS-B aircraft traffic near a location, listing specific data fields returned (callsign, altitude, speed, heading). It distinguishes effectively from siblings like check_airspace by focusing on aircraft traffic rather than airspace restrictions.

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 implies usage for checking live traffic near a location but does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives (e.g., check_airspace). No guidance on when not to use or conditions for accurate data.

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