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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the optional month behavior (annual overview when omitted) and lists the output fields. For a read-only data tool, this is sufficient behavioral disclosure.

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 concise sentences in Italian, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by the optional behavior. No filler or redundancy.

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 tool is simple and well-scoped. The description covers purpose, output content, and the key optional parameter. No output schema exists, but the enumerated fields compensate. Sibling tools do not overlap semantically.

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 parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the 'mese' omission behavior and adds output field context, but does not provide additional parameter-level details beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool provides monthly climate data for a Canary Island, enumerating the data categories (air/sea temperatures, rain, sunshine, wind, season, advice). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools that cover hotels, offers, excursions, and guides.

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?

Usage context is implied: use for climate queries. The description gives guidance on omitting 'mese' to get the annual overview, but does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions.

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