get_current_weather

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core function and parameters, but does not describe what specific weather conditions are returned, how errors are handled, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant transparency gap.

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 efficient, with one sentence for purpose and a structured list for arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the format is scannable and free of 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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool, the inputs are well covered, but the absence of an output schema leaves the return format undefined. The description does not explain what constitutes 'current weather conditions' (e.g., temperature, humidity), nor does it address error scenarios, making it merely adequate with clear 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 description thoroughly explains both parameters beyond the schema: 'location' includes optional country code with example, and 'units' lists the exact values and their temperature scales (Celsius, Fahrenheit, Kelvin). This fully compensates for the 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 action and resource: 'Get current weather conditions for a location.' The term 'current' effectively distinguishes it from siblings like get_weather_forecast (future) and get_air_quality (different data type).

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 only implied through the word 'current,' suggesting it is for present conditions rather than forecasts. However, no explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so the agent is not directly guided on when to use this tool vs. siblings.

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