get_hourly_forecast

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the hours range (1-48, default 24) and default location behavior (null becomes home). However, it does not mention any restrictions, error handling, or that it's a read operation, leaving gaps in understanding.

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 extremely concise: two sentences front-load the core purpose and parameters, with an additional line for a practical example. No wasted words.

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 tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: returned fields, hour range, and default location. It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly, though missing output structure details (array vs object) are mitigated by the output schema.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the hours parameter's range and default, and the location parameter's default behavior (null = home). It adds value beyond the schema but could be more precise about location format.

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 it provides an hourly forecast with specific fields (temperature, rain in mm and probability, wind, weather condition). It explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by specifying 'stündlich' (hourly) and gives a concrete use case example for checking night conditions.

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 this tool (hourly needs) versus siblings by contrasting with daily and current. It provides a clear example (checking windows at night) but lacks explicit exclusions or direct comparison to siblings.

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