高德中国天气

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. Description adds the crucial authentication requirement (AMAP_API_KEY), which is beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two very concise sentences. No wasted words: purpose, parameter hint, and authentication requirement are all front-loaded and clear.

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 tool with 2 parameters, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains purpose, parameter usage, and authentication. It could mention return format, but not required.

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?

Schema covers both parameters with clear descriptions (e.g., city examples, extensions enum with defaults). Tool description adds no new parameter info beyond the schema, so baseline score 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?

Description clearly states the tool queries real-time weather or forecast for Chinese cities. It specifies the verb '查询' (query) and resource '天气' (weather), and distinguishes from sibling tools (none are weather-specific).

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?

Provides clear instructions: city can be name or adcode, extensions parameter explains base vs all, and mentions the AMAP_API_KEY requirement. No explicit alternatives or exclusions, but context is adequate.

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