find_storms

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

The description discloses the read-only nature (consistent with annotations), data sources, and output format. It adds context beyond annotations by specifying the verification method and excluding forecasts.

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 (two sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes essential details 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?

The description explains the output (storm IDs) and how to use them with other tools, but lacks details on parameter usage. Given the moderate complexity (4 optional parameters, no output schema), it is partially 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?

The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for the parameters. With only 50% schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to describe the type, limit, bbox, or since parameters.

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 lists radar-verified hail/wind storm events, specifying the data source and that it returns storm IDs for use with other tools. It effectively distinguishes itself by noting it is not based on forecasts.

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 explains when to use the tool (to list verified events) and hints at the downstream use with get_swath_report and show_swath_map. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with siblings like list_monitors.

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