get_forecast

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the action of retrieving a forecast without detailing behaviors such as units (metric/imperial), forecast period (current, 7-day, etc.), data source, or potential error conditions.

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 and the primary sentence is front-loaded. However, the Args block is redundant with the schema, repeating property names and basic meanings that are already present in the schema titles, which slightly wastes space.

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?

Despite the simplicity of the tool, the description lacks essential context: it doesn't specify what the forecast contains (temperature, precipitation, wind), the units used, or the forecast duration. The output schema is present but not described, so an agent must guess what to expect from the return value.

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 zero description coverage, and the description's Args section only restates the schema property names ('Latitude' and 'Longitude') with trivial words like 'of the location'. No additional semantic details are provided, such as valid ranges, units, or 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 a location' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_alerts', which presumably handles alerts rather than forecasts.

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 implied usage is clear: use this tool when a weather forecast is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this over 'get_alerts' or any exclusions, leaving the distinction to be inferred from the name alone.

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