Wspr Snr Trend

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive tool. Beyond that, the description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing that the output is an hourly SNR bucket series for a specific path, which helps the agent understand result granularity.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action and resource. There is minor repetition of 'over time' and 'specific path,' but every sentence contributes useful information and nothing is bloated.

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 read-only query tool with complete parameter descriptions, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what is returned and when it is useful. No critical calling information is missing.

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 tx, rx, band, and hours parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description implies path endpoints and time variation but does not add syntax or filtering details beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score appropriate.

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 SNR trend over time for a specific WSPR path,' and clarifies that it shows hourly SNR buckets between two endpoints. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the related sibling wspr_propagation.

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 gives a use case: seeing when a band opens and closes on a specific path and how signal strength varies over time. However, it does not say when to choose this tool over alternatives such as wspr_propagation, nor does it state any exclusions or preconditions.

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