usgs-earthquake

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks details on behavioral traits like rate limits, idempotency, or side effects. It only mentions the tool returns specific fields, which is more about output than behavior.

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 at two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. It is well-structured for quick reading, though could be slightly more organized with bullet points for filters.

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 output schema, the description adequately lists the returned fields (location, magnitude, depth, PAGER alert, URL) and mentions free access. It covers the essential context for a data retrieval tool with 6 optional parameters.

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 parameter descriptions in the schema. The description complements by summarizing filter categories but adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema's detailed descriptions.

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 real-time global earthquake events from USGS and lists filter options. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'earthquake-intel', which could serve a similar purpose.

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 it is a free source with no API key, providing context for use. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or provide explicit alternatives, such as the sibling 'earthquake-intel'.

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