Lists synthetic nebular spectrum templates for H II regions, planetary nebulae, SNR shocks, Crab filaments/synchrotron, and single lines, plus the known emission lines.
List synthetic nebular spectrum templates (H II region, planetary nebula, SNR shock, Crab Nebula filaments/synchrotron, single lines) and the known emission lines.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that this is a synthetic template/line listing and therefore likely read-only, but it does not state side effects, permissions, or output behavior beyond the content categories.
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?
It is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource. The parenthetical categories earn their place by clarifying the scope of templates.
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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is listed: synthetic spectrum templates across several astrophysical categories plus known emission lines. It could say more about the return structure, but the essential scope is covered.
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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4. The empty schema is consistent with the description.
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 uses a specific verb, "List," and a specific resource, "synthetic nebular spectrum templates," and enumerates the template categories and emission lines. It is clear what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the nearby plotting or search tools.
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 does not say when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as plot_nebula_spectrum, search_nebulae, or get_nebula. Usage is only implied by the fact that it is a listing tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.