get_current_weather

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It helpfully discloses the return payload (current conditions, 8-day daily, 48-hour hourly), which tells the agent what it will get back. However, it omits any auth, rate-limit, or data-refresh context, so it only partially covers the behavioral profile.

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 tight sentences with zero waste; the location constraint is front-loaded and the return scope follows immediately.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains the return contents, which is the key missing structured data. The only gap is the undocumented exclusion behavior and any location-vs-coordinate prerequisite, but overall it is sufficient to call the tool correctly.

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 100%, so lat, lon, and exclude are all documented in the schema. The description restates lat/lon meaning but adds no syntax or format detail and never mentions the exclude filtering capability. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get current weather and forecast') and scopes it to a lat/lon location, which implicitly sets it apart from get_coordinates_from_location. It is clear but does not explicitly name the sibling tools it should be chosen over.

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 '(lat/lon)' qualifier implies you must already have coordinates, hinting that get_coordinates_from_location is a prerequisite step, but this is left to inference. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_weather_history.

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