nws_search_blocks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: whether results are paginated, whether the match is exact or fuzzy, whether stationId is required for meaningful results, or whether the operation is read-only are all unstated. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage this is a substantial gap.

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?

It is a single efficient sentence with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. The brevity, however, reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision, so it is only minimally adequate.

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?

With three parameters at 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description would need to carry meaning about inputs and behavior, and it does not. An agent cannot determine from this definition how to scope or interpret a query beyond the raw types.

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% and none of the three parameters (query, limit, stationId) are explained in the description. It does not say what query matches against, that limit caps result count (1-100), or that stationId scopes the search, so the description adds no meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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 gives a verb plus resource ("Search page blocks inside NWS stations"), so the basic action is identifiable. However, "page blocks" is unexplained jargon and the description offers no differentiation from the sibling nws_search, which an agent would reasonably assume searches the same content space.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus nws_search, nws_summarize_station, or nws_list_stations, all of which appear in the sibling list. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated, leaving routing entirely to inference from the name.

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