set_weather

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates the weather changes instantly and lists valid values, but does not clarify if the change is client-side or persistent, or whether it affects all players. This is sufficient for a simple setter but lacks deeper context.

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 one short sentence followed by a list of allowed values—concise and front-loaded. Every part is necessary, with 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is almost complete. It covers the purpose, parameters, and expected values. It could optionally mention scope (all players or local client) but is not lacking critically.

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 has a single string parameter 'weather' with no enum or description (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by explicitly listing all valid values (CLEAR, EXTRASUNNY, etc.), providing critical 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 name 'set_weather' combined with the description 'Set weather instantly' clearly communicates the verb and resource. The description lists all valid weather values, which distinguishes it from siblings such as 'set_time' or 'set_health'.

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 usage by stating what the tool does, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, and among siblings there is no alternative weather tool, so the guidance is adequate but minimal.

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