weather_get_historical_weather

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It communicates that this is a read-only operation via the verb 'Get', but does not mention potential limitations such as data availability, date range constraints, or required permissions. This is adequate for a simple getter but not richly informative.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and resource. It contains no redundant information and is perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description sufficiently covers its purpose and scope. It could mention return formats or data source specifics, but for a basic historical weather lookup, it is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool. The schema covers parameter details, so the description does not need to repeat them.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for both parameters (location, date) with descriptions, so the schema carries the parameter semantics. The description does not add any additional format or constraint details beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 historical weather observations' with a specific scope ('for a location on a past date'). It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like weather_get_current_weather and weather_get_forecast by emphasizing 'historical' and 'past date'.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool—when past weather data is needed for a specific location and date. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the wording naturally implies using this tool instead of current or forecast weather tools.

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