enter_weather_search_israel

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the tool interacts with a shared page context, waits for autocomplete results, and requires prior initialization. This is adequate, though it doesn't mention timeout behavior or error states.

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-loading the core action. The second sentence adds essential usage context. It is concise but could be more compact—e.g., combining the prerequisite note into the first sentence.

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 simple parameter set (1 required string), the existence of an output schema (likely for the autocomplete results), and sibling tools, the description covers the key interaction flow. It provides prerequisite guidance and action semantics. A mention of what happens after autocomplete (e.g., next tool to use) would increase completeness.

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 coverage is 0% (only one parameter with no description), so the description must compensate. The description explains what the 'city' parameter is used for: entering into a search field. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema property definition. A brief note on format or examples would improve it further.

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 action (enter city name into search field) and the expected behavior (wait for autocomplete results). It is specific about the resource (search field) and the interaction type. However, it does not explicitly reference the tool name's 'weather search Israel' context, which is implied.

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 mentions that open_weather_forecast_israel should be called first, providing explicit prerequisite guidance. However, it does not address when to use this tool vs alternatives like select_weather_forecast_city_israel, or what to do if autocomplete fails.

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