get_live_spot_forecastUse this when the user asks whether a specific surf spot is worth surfing or traveling to soon. Fetches the live 10-day Strike Mission forecast and best days for one spot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| spot | Yes | Spot name, slug, or numeric Strike Mission spot id, for example Uluwatu, uluwatu, or 1. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it fetches a live 10-day forecast and best days, which is consistent and provides behavioral context without contradiction.
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, front-loaded with the use case, and no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.
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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does (fetches forecast) and when to use it. It does not detail output format but is sufficient for selection.
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 a clear description of the 'spot' parameter. The description adds no further semantic detail beyond 'one spot', so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 'Fetches the live 10-day Strike Mission forecast and best days for one spot' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'one spot' and live forecast versus planning/comparing.
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?
Explicitly says 'Use this when the user asks whether a specific surf spot is worth surfing or traveling to soon.' It provides clear context but does not explicitly list when not to use or name alternatives, though siblings imply other cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tools have overlapping purposes: compare_surf_destinations, recommend_surf_trip_destinations, and find_surf_trip_guides all provide destination recommendations and planning guidance, making it unclear when to use which. The descriptions partially differentiate them but boundaries remain ambiguous.
All tool names follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., compare_surf_destinations, get_live_spot_forecast) using snake_case. While verbs vary, the pattern is consistent and predictable. No mixing of conventions or unclear naming.
With 5 tools covering recommendations, comparisons, forecasts, and spot details, the count is well-scoped for a specialized surf trip planner. Each tool serves a clear role without being excessive or sparse.
The tool set covers core surf trip planning needs: destination recommendations, comparisons, live forecasts, and spot context. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for managing user preferences or historical data), but agents can still plan effectively.