sg_weather

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool's behavior varies by period and gives a high-level description of the data returned. However, it omits details such as data source, update frequency, units, and response structure, which would improve behavioral prediction.

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 brief, front-loaded with the main purpose, and efficiently packs the period distinctions into one sentence 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?

For a tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers the selection of period but does not describe the response format, units, or data fields. This leaves the agent uncertain about what to expect in the return value.

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 input schema already documents the period enum with descriptions, and the tool description adds richer semantics by specifying exactly what each period provides. The default value is also clear. This goes beyond the schema's baseline.

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 gets Singapore weather forecast and enumerates the three forecast periods with their specific outputs, distinguishing it from weather-related siblings like sg_rainfall and sg_air_quality.

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 clear usage context by explaining what each period option yields (2h per-area, 24h temp/humidity overview, 4day outlook), which guides period selection. However, it does not explicitly discuss when to choose this tool over related weather tools like sg_rainfall or sg_air_quality.

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