extract_weather_data_israel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool will 'attempt' extraction (indicating potential failure) and remove 'obvious noise like advertisements, links, and short UI strings'. However, it does not specify what happens if no forecast is found or if extraction fails, leaving gaps in behavioral expectation.

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—the first states the core purpose, the second adds essential context (precondition and noise removal). Every sentence earns its place; there is no redundancy or extraneous 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 tool has no parameters and an output schema (from context signals), the description covers all needed context: what the tool does, expected preconditions, and what noise is cleaned. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be described. The description is complete for agent decision-making.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% as there is nothing to document. The baseline per rubric is 4 for no parameters. The description adds no parameter info (unnecessary) and instead explains the tool's operation, which aligns with a score of 4.

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 verb 'extract' and resource 'visible forecast text from the current page'. It differentiates from sibling tools (which handle navigation and selection) by specifying that extraction occurs after the forecast page is loaded, establishing a unique role in the workflow.

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 a precondition: the forecast page must already be loaded, specifically after calling 'select_weather_forecast_city_israel'. This provides clear context for when to use the tool. It does not list exclusions or alternative tools, but the sequential dependency is sufficient given the sibling context.

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