Sota Spots

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only that the result is a 'live spot feed with summit details', which is modest additional context and largely duplicated by the output schema.

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 short sentences with the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the second sentence carries little that the output schema does not already state.

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?

With a rich annotation set, a full output schema, and 100% parameter coverage, the main remaining gap is distinguishing this live spot feed from sota_alerts and sota_summit_info. The description does not close that gap, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 mode, hours, and association filters are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no filtering semantics or examples beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb (Get) and resource (SOTA spots) with a clear scope: 'current and recent'. It does not differentiate from the sibling sota_alerts, which an agent could easily confuse with a live spot feed, so the purpose is clear but not disambiguated.

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?

'Current and recent' implies usage for real-time monitoring, and the schema's hours default of 24 reinforces that. However, the description never states when to prefer this over sota_alerts or sota_summit_info, and gives no exclusions or prerequisites, leaving usage to inference.

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