query_noaa_swpc_kp

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load. 'Observed' usefully distinguishes measured values from predicted ones, and 'with retrieval timestamps' tells the agent data freshness is returned, but it omits any mention of auth, rate limits, update cadence, or whether alerts may be empty.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the primary data product, with the secondary product and output note trailing. No wasted words.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and a no-parameter tool needs no input discussion. What remains thin is operational context (freshness/update cadence of SWPC data), but nothing required for a correct call is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; the baseline applies. No parameter text is needed.

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?

States a specific verb (Fetch) and two specific resources (observed planetary Kp, current SWPC alerts) plus an output property (retrieval timestamps). It is unambiguous against the space-weather-unrelated siblings (analyze_notam_tfr, fetch_celestrak_tle), though it never names or contrasts them explicitly.

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 on when to use this versus an alternative source of geomagnetic data, and no mention of conditions such as alert-only checks or historical Kp. 'observed' and 'current' imply present-time monitoring but the agent must infer that.

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