Set weather

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and default world; it does not mention whether the change is global, persistent, impacts all players, or requires permissions. This is a minimal disclosure that leaves significant gaps.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no extraneous words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 the simple tool and no output schema, the description covers the core action and default world. However, it omits any mention of side effects on existing weather, whether the change is permanent, or how players experience it. For a tool without annotations, a little more behavioral context would be beneficial, but it is not severely incomplete.

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 schema already documents 67% of parameters (world and player), and the description adds the default world behavior ('default: the player's world'), which adds value. However, it does not clarify the weather enum options or the player default beyond what the schema provides, so the incremental contribution is moderate.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'weather', scoped to 'a world', with a helpful default note. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_time_weather, which retrieves conditions rather than changing them.

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 implies the usage context (changing weather) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_time_weather or set_time, nor does it state when not to use the tool. The default-world information is a small but useful contextual hint.

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