solar_xray

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the output includes current flare class, X-ray flux, and HF impact assessment, and provides context on the classification scale and effects. However, it does not mention whether the data is from a specific satellite or update frequency.

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 description is concise, with two short paragraphs. The first sentence front-loads the main action, and the rest adds necessary context without unnecessary 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?

Given no parameters and an output schema (exists), the description sufficiently explains the return values, including the classification and HF impact. It is complete for a simple data retrieval 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?

There are no parameters, so the description adds all meaning beyond the empty schema. It clearly explains what the tool returns and the significance of the X-ray classification.

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 the tool retrieves GOES X-ray flux and solar flare status, specifying the X-ray classification (A, B, C, M, X) and the impact of M/X flares on HF radio blackouts. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like solar_alerts or solar_forecast.

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 implies the tool is for current solar flare status but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like solar_alerts or solar_conditions. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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