pota_user_statsRetrieves Parks on the Air activator and hunter statistics for a given callsign, so you can review a user's POTA activity.
Get POTA activator and hunter statistics for a callsign.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| callsign | Yes | Callsign to look up (e.g., K4SWL, KI7MT). |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world lookup. The description adds only that the result covers activator and hunter statistics, with no extra behavioral detail such as data freshness or error behavior; the output schema likely covers return structure.
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?
The definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and scope immediately.
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?
For a one-parameter read-only lookup with rich annotations, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient to call the tool correctly. It could be stronger only by briefly clarifying when to prefer it over sibling statistics tools.
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 100%, so the callsign parameter is already well documented with examples. The description mentions the callsign context but adds no format, validation, or lookup semantics beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource: get POTA activator and hunter statistics for a callsign. This clearly distinguishes it from park-oriented siblings such as pota_park_stats and pota_park_activations, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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?
Usage is implied by 'for a callsign,' but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or comparisons with sibling tools. An agent can infer the context but is not routed between this and related lookups.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.