Meteo di quota

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the read-only nature. The description adds useful behavioral context: the forecast is elevation-corrected and includes specific weather variables. It does not contradict annotations and offers extra detail beyond the structured data.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('hourly forecast for a point') and then lists key output elements. All words are informative, with no filler.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. The description conveys the essential behavior and output content, but it omits the configurable time range (ore_max) and how coordinates are specified, leaving some gaps that the schema does not fully fill. Adequate but not fully complete.

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?

With schema description coverage at only 40%, the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It only reinforces quota_m through 'elevazione indicata' and fails to explain lat/lon coordinate formats, ore_max meaning, or the date parameter details. Minimal added value 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 it provides an hourly weather forecast for a point, corrected for elevation ('Previsione oraria per un punto, corretta per l'elevazione indicata') and lists included elements (zero termico, raffiche, neve fresca). It is specific about the resource but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like bollettino_valanghe.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bollettino_valanghe or zona_valanghe_da_coordinate. The description neither mentions siblings nor provides conditions for selection, leaving usage entirely implicit.

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