sota_spots

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states it returns a live spot feed, lacking details on idempotency, rate limits, data freshness, or potential side effects. As a read operation, additional context like real-time nature or caching would be helpful.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: first states the action, second explains the return value. No superfluous text.

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 simple tool with 3 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it could mention the context of 'spots' (e.g., summit activations or contacts) or provide usage hints among siblings. The output schema covers return structure, so not a major gap.

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% with each parameter having a description and default. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate. No further clarification of parameter semantics is provided.

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 current and recent SOTA spots with summit details. The verb 'Get' and resource 'SOTA spots' are specific, and the name sota_spots distinguishes it from siblings like sota_alerts or sota_summit_info, though no explicit differentiation is given.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over its siblings (e.g., sota_alerts for alerts, sota_summits_near for nearby summits), nor does it specify any prerequisites or exclusions.

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