Kawazu Early Cherry Blossom Forecast

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) already indicate safe read-only behavior. Description adds value by detailing return components (forecast comment, map links, spots with percentages, dates, coordinates), providing context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first gives usage guidance, second lists outputs. No unnecessary words, well-structured, and front-loaded with key information.

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?

Tool is simple (2 optional params, no output schema). Description covers return values well. Minor gap: does not clarify if spot filtering returns a subset of the full list. Overall complete for its complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description does not add extra meaning to parameters beyond the schema; it only mentions outputs. No added value for parameter semantics.

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 explicitly states it is for Kawazu early cherry blossom requests in January-February, specifying the region (Izu Peninsula) and distinguishing from standard Somei-Yoshino sakura. Verb 'use' with specific resource and scope provides clear purpose.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (January-February requests, Kawazu-zakura, early blossoms, Izu Peninsula) and when not to use (standard Somei-Yoshino elsewhere). This helps differentiate from sibling sakura tools without naming alternatives.

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