get_forecast_global

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the tool uses a free API requiring no authentication, which is positive. However, it does not mention rate limits, error handling for invalid coordinates, or response structure. Still, it provides useful behavioral 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 extremely concise: two short paragraphs with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the purpose and includes essential usage notes. Every sentence is earned.

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 low complexity (2 params, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the API source and coordinate examples. Minor gaps like timezone or units are acceptable for a simple forecast tool.

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 0% description coverage, so the description's 'Args' section adds value by providing example values (e.g., 28.6139 for New Delhi). This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions and clarifies the coordinate 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 'Get weather forecast for any location worldwide including India', which specifies the verb and resource. The name 'get_forecast_global' and the sibling 'get_forecast' hint at a regional distinction, but the description does not explicitly differentiate usage, so it's not a 5.

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 mentions it uses the free Open-Meteo API with no API key, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings. This is minimal but adequate.

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