get_current_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses behavioral traits: uses live data when reachable, falls back to clear-sky model, and returns current UV index, minutes needed, and window timing. This is adequate for a read-only tool, though data freshness or caching is not mentioned.

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 that efficiently conveys purpose, data source, and return values. It is front-loaded with the key question. While slightly dense, every clause adds value and there is no redundancy.

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 tool has 8 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides sufficient context: it explains the high-level behavior, data source fallback, and lists the key return components (UV index, minutes needed, window). This allows an agent to understand tool usage and expected output.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds context about location dependence (lat/lon) but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It does not compensate for any missing schema descriptions.

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 tool checks if 'RIGHT NOW' is good for vitamin D synthesis using live UV/cloud data (or clear-sky fallback). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_vitamin_d_window' (which likely returns just the window) and 'get_sun_times' (sun times only) by focusing on current moment and live 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?

The description implies usage for current moment decisions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions data source conditions (live vs. clear-sky model) but no when-not-to-use or alternative tool names are provided.

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