Змінити погоду

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool runs the equivalent of /weather and supports an optional duration, but it does not mention side effects, persistence, permissions, or output behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the action, the accepted values, and the optional duration without redundancy or 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?

The definition is adequate for a simple setter: it gives the action, values, and optional duration, and there is no output schema to explain. Missing context about operational effects and when to prefer this over a generic command leaves moderate 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?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, but the description compensates by explicitly naming the weather values and clarifying that duration_seconds is optional and measured in seconds. timeout_ms remains well-documented in the schema itself.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Встановлює погоду на сервері' (sets the weather on the server), and lists the valid values and optional duration. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose but does not explicitly differentiate it from similar siblings like mc_set_time.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as mc_command or mc_set_time. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or explicit usage conditions beyond the general weather-setting context.

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