List Accepted Weather Conditions

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

Adds value beyond annotations by describing pagination behavior (page and per_page), response format (paginated JSON array with metadata), and API endpoint. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, open-world. No contradictions.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and usage. Some redundancy (e.g., 'enumerate Daily Log records' repeated) and extra detail about API path, but overall efficient for a list tool.

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?

Covers core purpose, pagination, and API context. However, lacks clarity on what 'accepted' means versus other weather logs, and the mention of 'filter by query parameters' is not fully supported by the schema. Adequate but with gaps.

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 baseline 3 applies. Description reiterates project_id as required and explains pagination usage, but adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema's own 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 it returns accepted weather conditions for specific categories (sky, ground, temperature, calamity, wind). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_weather_logs by focusing on 'accepted' conditions rather than general weather logs.

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?

Provides usage scenarios (enumerate Daily Log records, paginated overview, find IDs) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. Mentions filtering by query parameters, but the schema lacks filter parameters beyond pagination, which may mislead.

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