atlas_weather_context

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes return fields (condition, risk_level, etc.) but does not disclose potential issues like network dependency or fallback behavior beyond mentioning fallback_used. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Very concise with Args and Returns sections, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 only one parameter and an output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, input, and output. Minor gap in usage guidelines but overall adequate 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 0%, but description adds 'neutral place name' with examples, providing crucial context for the location parameter beyond just type string.

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?

Clearly states verb 'gets' and resource 'safety-relevant weather context'. Distinguishes from siblings like atlas_aqi_context (air quality) and atlas_civic_signal (civic signals) by focusing on weather.

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?

Implicitly suggests use for safety-relevant weather but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. No mention of alternatives among siblings.

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