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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose key behavior: this is a UI form, values update live, results come back into conversation, and nothing is auto-available to other tools unless passed explicitly. It does not say whether selections are persisted to a profile, or what happens on cancel/dismiss.

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?

Three tight sentences (~65 words), front-loaded with the action and its payload, then the trigger conditions, then the downstream hand-off. Nothing is redundant with the title or schema.

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 an eight-param, fully documented, zero-annotation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, triggers, and result flow adequately. The remaining gaps — persistence semantics and optional pre-fill behavior — are real but secondary for a form-display tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3, and the schema already explains ranges, units, and defaults well. The description adds nothing about the four non-collected parameters (lat, lon, timezone, placeName) used for the live estimate, and its 'four values' framing understates an eight-parameter schema.

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?

States a specific action (show an interactive form) and enumerates the four values it collects, so the agent knows what it gets. It does not differentiate itself from the similar-sounding siblings get_my_profile / update_my_profile, leaving the persisted-profile vs. transient-form distinction implicit.

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?

Gives three concrete triggers — values unknown, user wants to change them, or prefer this over asking one at a time in conversation — plus an explicit follow-up ('pass those values explicitly to the other tools afterwards'). No exclusions or contrast with update_my_profile, which is the one sibling that could plausibly be chosen instead.

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