get_weather_analysis

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint, the description reveals response ordering (hourly, most recent first), specific fields with units, error behavior when coordinates are out of range or API is unreachable, and regional coverage. It also notes data availability nuances such as 'later windows only populated at some hours'.

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?

Despite being lengthy, each sentence serves a distinct purpose: definition, use cases, return data, error handling, and coverage. The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core action, containing no redundant or wasted text.

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 no output schema, the description thoroughly enumerates all returned data fields and units, explains the data source and nature, provides usage context, and describes failure modes. It gives a complete picture of the tool's behavior without requiring external documentation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that coordinates must be within the indicated geographical coverage and that out-of-range values trigger an error. It also connects the 'past ~24 hours' phrasing to the hours parameter, supplementing the schema's 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 retrieves past ~24 hours of gridded meteorological analysis from SMHI's Mesan2gv3 API, explicitly noting it is 'not a forecast'. It differentiates from sibling tools by recommending forecast tools for future conditions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly lists when to use this tool: for nowcasting, verifying past forecasts, and historical lookups. It also states to use forecast tools instead for future conditions, providing clear alternatives and excluding misuse.

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