get_vast_forecast

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not describe what the report contains, whether it requires special permissions, or any output format. This is insufficient for a tool with no other safety indicators.

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 short sentence, which is structurally concise, but it is under-specified to the point of being unhelpful. It lacks the detail needed to earn its place, though it is not verbose.

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 absence of annotations, output schema, and the presence of many related sibling tools, this description is far too minimal. It does not explain what a VAST forecast report is, how the parameters affect the report, or what the response looks like, leaving the agent with insufficient context.

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 description coverage is 100% because both parameters have descriptions ('Date preset' and 'Timezone'), but these are minimal and add little meaning. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter context, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get VAST forecast report' clearly identifies the action (Get) and resource (VAST forecast report), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it does not distinguish this from siblings like get_vast_report or get_vast_channel_forecast, lacking scope differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_display_forecast or get_vast_channel_forecast. No context or exclusion criteria are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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