qrz_lookup

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

The description lists the fields returned and implies a read operation, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or non-destructive. Without annotations, the description should confirm idempotency. The subscription note hints at partial behavior, but it's unclear what happens with a missing subscription.

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: one for the core function and one for the subscription requirement. No superfluous content. The key information is front-loaded.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's purpose and the subscription dependency. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values. Missing minor details like case sensitivity or error handling, but overall sufficient for a 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 coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add deeper meaning to the parameters; it only restates what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states the tool looks up a callsign on QRZ.com and enumerates the returned data (name, grid, DXCC, etc.). The verb 'look up' and resource 'callsign' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like qrz_download or qrz_dxcc.

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 mentions the prerequisite of a QRZ XML Subscription for full fields, which provides some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., qrz_dxcc for DXCC info) or when not to use it.

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