get_daily_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by naming the output fields and coverage area, but omits important details such as temperature units, data source, and error behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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 three short sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: the action, the return content, and the coverage. There is no redundancy or fluff, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 read-only tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what is returned, the time window (1-10 days), and the supported region. Given that the schema fully documents parameters and there is no output schema, this level of detail is largely sufficient, though explicitly stating units (e.g., Celsius/Fahrenheit) would make it fully complete.

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 already provides complete documentation for all three parameters, including descriptions and constraints. The tool description adds only the geographic coverage context, which helps interpret valid latitude/longitude values but does not fundamentally change understanding of the parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves a daily weather summary for a 1-10 day period and lists the exact return fields (high/low temperatures, dominant conditions, precipitation totals). The 'daily' qualifier distinguishes it from the hourly and current weather sibling tools, even though no alternatives are explicitly named.

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 when to use the tool (when a daily summary is needed) and states the geographic coverage limitations, giving the agent context for whether the request is supported. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like get_hourly_forecast for finer granularity or get_current_weather for current conditions, so it lacks explicit exclusion criteria.

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