get_heatwave_forecast

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core calculation logic (correlating high temps with drought/soil moisture) but inaccurately states a fixed 7-day forecast despite the schema allowing a configurable 'days' parameter, and it does not mention any limitations or prerequisites.

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 two sentences with no filler; it front-loads the primary action and adds a practical use case. Both sentences earn their 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?

The description covers what the tool does and when to use it, but it omits the configurability of the forecast length and does not clarify its relationship to the sibling tool get_weather_and_heat_risk. The presence of an output schema partially compensates for not describing the return format, but overall it leaves gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the latitude/longitude/days parameters. It only mentions '7-day', which hints at the days parameter but does not indicate that it is adjustable or clarify the coordinate requirements.

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 fetches a 7-day weather forecast and calculates a Climate Aggravation Risk, with a specific use case ('predict upcoming heatwaves'). It lacks an explicit differentiation from the sibling tool get_weather_and_heat_risk, whose name suggests overlapping functionality.

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 provides a clear usage context ('Use this to predict upcoming heatwaves and warn the user'), but does not mention alternatives or exclusions, such as when to prefer get_weather_and_heat_risk or other tools. This fits the 'clear context, no exclusions' level.

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