Arctic Sea Ice Extent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint; description adds no contradictory info. It adds context about the data source (NSIDC) and default time range, but no further behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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 sentences contain all essential information: source, metric, units, time range, default. No redundancy or unnecessary details.

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?

Tool is simple with one optional parameter and an output schema. Description covers source, units, temporal scope, and default behavior. Output schema (present) handles return format.

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 clear parameter description (years, min/max, default). Description echoes the default ('Returns last 10 years by default') without adding extra meaning or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states verb ('Tracks long-term decline' and 'Returns'), resource ('Arctic sea ice extent from NSIDC'), and scope ('monthly measurements in million km² since 1979'). Clearly distinguishes from sibling climate indicators (e.g., CO2, temperature).

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?

Description provides context on default behavior ('Returns last 10 years by default') and temporal coverage. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the uniqueness of Arctic ice data makes usage clear.

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