current_weather

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully explain behavioral traits, but it only says 'current weather'. It does not mention data source, units, freshness, failure behavior, or any other operational considerations that an agent should know before invoking it.

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 concisely four intuitive sentences, directly states the core function, and uses a simple 'Args' outline for the parameter. There is no repetition or unstructured detail, making it easy to parse.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool, the description is mostly sufficient, and an output schema exists so the return value is largely handled. However, the lack of usage guidance and behavioral disclosure leaves the agent with incomplete context beyond the essential call pattern, bringing it to a minimal viable level.

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 input schema only has 'city' with no description, so the description's extra explanation of the city parameter is valuable. It defines city as a locality and gives concrete examples like 'Ижевск' or 'Berlin', which adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 states the specific verb and resource: 'Текущая погода в указанном городе' (current weather in a specified city). It clearly identifies city as the target and provides examples, and the word 'текущая' distinguishes it from the sibling 'forecast', though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus the siblings 'forecast' or 'locate'. The description only defines the tool's function; it does not mention exclusions, alternative conditions, or scenarios that would favor another tool.

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