swpc_forecast

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the output is 'forecast text' and enumerating the covered domains (solar activity, geomagnetic, radiation), giving the agent a clear expectation of the result content without contradicting the annotation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb 'Get,' and every word contributes meaning. There is no redundancy or filler, making it an model of conciseness.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is adequately complete: it names the source (NOAA SWPC), the time horizon (3-day), the format (text), and content areas. It does not detail the exact text format, but given the tool's simplicity, this is sufficient.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema provides no parameter detail. The baseline is 4, and the description enriches the tool's semantics by explaining what the returned forecast includes, which helps the agent understand the output despite having no inputs.

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 the tool's function: 'Get 3-day space weather forecast text from NOAA SWPC.' It specifies the resource (NOAA SWPC) and the output (3-day forecast text), and lists the content areas (solar activity, geomagnetic, and radiation environment forecasts), which distinguishes it from siblings like swpc_alerts or swpc_kp_index.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need a 3-day space weather forecast in text form. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the clarity of '3-day forecast text' provides enough context to differentiate it from other SWPC tools like alerts or indices.

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