nws_point_lookup

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, signaling a safe read operation. The description adds return-value details (grid office, gridX, gridY, timezone, county), but does not disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, error handling, or accuracy limitations. This meets the baseline with annotations present but does not exceed it.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: action, key return values, and contextual importance. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids unnecessary detail.

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 of a simple two-parameter lookup tool, the description is complete enough. It clearly states what the tool returns and why it matters. No output schema exists, but the return values are named explicitly, so agents know what to expect.

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%, with clear descriptions for latitude and longitude including ranges and examples. The description adds no extra semantics about the parameters, but this is acceptable since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 ('Resolve') and a specific resource ('latitude/longitude to an NWS forecast grid point'), clearly stating what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like nws_forecast by emphasizing it provides the grid coordinates needed for forecast calls.

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 explicitly states this is 'the essential first step before getting forecasts,' giving clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is strong enough for an agent to understand its role in the forecast workflow.

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