weather.zip

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the data source (NOAA NWS) but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as update frequency, rate limits, or what specific weather elements are returned (temperature, humidity, etc.).

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 short sentence, front-loaded with key information. It is concise, though could potentially include more detail without becoming verbose. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema) and the rich context of sibling tools, the description is minimally adequate. It provides the essential purpose and data source but lacks details on the response format or additional constraints.

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 schema already provides a clear description for the 'zip' parameter ('5-digit US ZIP code.'). The tool description adds context about the data being current US weather from NOAA NWS, but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema covers. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline 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 the verb 'weather' and the resource 'ZIP code', and includes a specific source (NOAA NWS). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'weather.alerts' by specifying 'current US weather'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for current weather by ZIP, but does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for different weather needs.

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