Get Weather Alerts

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the state-scoping behavior, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as whether alerts are current, source, or result limits. 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding of what the tool does, and it is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter getter.

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 a single required parameter, a fully documented schema, rich safety annotations, and an output schema present, the description is nearly complete. The only gap is that it does not explicitly route the agent between alerts and forecast, but the resource names make the distinction easy to infer.

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% and the state parameter already has a clear description with min/max length and an example. The description adds no meaning beyond saying 'for a state,' so it meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get weather alerts for a state.' It clearly identifies both the resource (weather alerts) and the scope (a state), and the tool name and resource type immediately distinguish it from the sibling get-forecast.

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 makes the intended context clear: use when weather alerts for a specific state are needed. It does not explicitly name get-forecast as the alternative or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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