get-weather

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the use of the Open-Meteo API and the dual output (current + daily), but does not disclose potential limitations like data freshness, error behavior, or rate limits. For a read-only weather tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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, compact sentence that is front-loaded with the core function. Every word adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is simple and the description covers the essential purpose. Since an output schema exists, the need to describe return values is reduced. It doesn't mention edge cases or prerequisites, but the complexity is low, making the description reasonably complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters with individual descriptions, so the description adds little beyond confirming the role of the forecast period as the forecast duration. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does 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 clearly identifies the tool as a weather data retriever using latitude/longitude and forecast period, specifying it returns both current conditions and daily forecasts. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like geocode or time.

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 the intended use case: obtaining weather for a given location and forecast range. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but there are no competing weather tools among the siblings, so the context is clear.

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