hamqth_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states that field availability depends on operator publication, but misses key behavioral traits such as idempotency, destuctiveness, rate limits, or authentication needs. For a read-only lookup, this is a medium 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and value, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Description mentions output fields and field availability variability. An output schema exists, so return format is covered. Lacks error handling or prerequisite context, but acceptable for a straightforward lookup 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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (persona and callsign). The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond listing output fields, which is already covered by schema. 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 'Look up a callsign on HamQTH' with specific verb and resource, and lists the types of information returned. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like hamqth_bio or hamqth_dxcc that focus on specific data.

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 provides basic context (free, no subscription) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like hamqth_bio or hamqth_dxcc. No when-not-to-use or error scenarios mentioned.

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