nowcast90-minute precipitation nowcast (Nordics only — outside region returns sparse data).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | Yes | ||
| lon | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | No | Feature type (GeoJSON) | |
| geometry | No | ||
| properties | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent behavior. The description adds context beyond annotations by specifying the 90-minute temporal scope and the behavioral consequence of sparse data outside the Nordics. This is valuable disclosure that helps the agent set expectations, though it does not detail the exact return format.
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 a single, tightly written sentence that conveys purpose, time horizon, and geographic limitation without any filler. It is concise, front-loaded, and easy to parse.
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, combined with rich annotations and an output schema, gives a reasonably complete picture for a simple tool. It covers the core function and the key limitation, and the schema example clarifies input usage. A slightly more explicit mention of parameter roles would elevate it further, but the current state is sufficient.
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 input schema provides only bare parameter names (lat, lon) with no descriptions, and the description does not explain their meaning or usage. The geographic hint ('Nordics only') indirectly implies that lat/lon are coordinates, but this does not compensate for the lack of explicit parameter semantics, especially given 0% schema description coverage.
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 provides a 90-minute precipitation nowcast, specifies the geographic scope (Nordics), and notes the sparse-data consequence outside that region. This distinguishes it from sibling weather tools like forecast or oceanforecast, making the purpose unmistakable.
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 explicitly states the regional limitation ('Nordics only') and warns about sparse data outside the region, effectively providing a when-to-use/when-not-to-use guide. However, it does not name alternative tools for other regions or longer timeframes, so it stops short of full guidance with alternatives.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is some overlap among closely related ones (e.g., ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research; multiple Polymarket tools). Descriptions are detailed enough to differentiate, but an agent might still misselect on subtle differences.
Names consistently use lowercase with underscores, but no strong verb_noun pattern. Some are noun-based (airquality, nowcast), others verb-based (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities). This is readable but not perfectly predictable.
35 tools is high but justified by the server's broad scope (data queries, betting analysis, weather, memory, subscriptions). The number feels appropriate given the comprehensive functionality described.
The tool set covers an impressively wide range of capabilities: data querying with multiple modes, entity profiling, comparisons, search, betting analysis, weather, memory, subscriptions, and feedback. Missing features (e.g., updating memories) are minor; the surface is remarkably complete.