Destination climate & best time to visit

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It accurately describes the output (climate card with specific metrics) and input flexibility. As a read-only tool, no destructive behavior disclosed, which is fine.

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 sentences, front-loaded with key data points, no wasted words. Efficiently communicates scope and input variations.

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?

Given one parameter, no output schema, no annotations, the description is adequately complete. It details what the tool returns and acceptable inputs. Minor gaps like error handling are acceptable for a simple tool.

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 coverage is 100% with clear description for 'destination' parameter. Description adds examples (Faro, Nice, France, FAO) but no additional meaning beyond schema. Baseline 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?

The description specifies it provides a full climate card including Sunshine Score, temperatures, rainfall, sea temperature, sunniest month, and annual sunshine hours for one destination. It clearly distinguishes from siblings (compare_destinations, find_sunny_destinations) by focusing on a single destination's detailed data.

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?

Description states when to use (need climate data for one destination) and acceptable formats (city name, city+country, IATA code). No explicit when-not or alternatives, but sibling tools provide context.

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