Open Meteo Weather Observation

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

Annotations already establish read-only, open-world, and idempotent behavior. The description adds useful context beyond the annotations by disclosing keyless access, the bounded-window model, and the resumption-cursor pattern.

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 tightly written sentences with the core operation front-loaded and no wasted wording. The cursor behavior and default window are stated efficiently.

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 an output schema and annotations present, return values and safety traits do not need explanation here. The description covers the key invocation pattern, though it could say more about window_days and units or date semantics.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains start_date well as a resumption cursor, but leaves latitude, longitude, and window_days to bare schema names and defaults, with only an implicit hint about the bounded window.

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: fetching a bounded window of daily historical weather for one place. The scope is clear, but it does not differentiate itself from the similar noaa_ghcnd_daily sibling.

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?

Gives explicit cursor usage: pass the previous call's next_cursor to continue a sweep, or omit start_date to begin about 30 days back. It also notes the tool is keyless, but provides no guidance on when to use this instead of the related NOAA or observation siblings.

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