Cherry Blossom Forecast

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

Description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: specifies data source (Japan Meteorological Corporation), what data is returned (forecast dates, full-bloom, observed, historical averages, status), and scale (48 observation cities). Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, so bar is lower; description adds significant value.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no redundancy. Every sentence earns its place: first for when to use, second for what it returns and sibling guidance.

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 has one optional parameter, output schema present, annotations cover read-only/idempotent. Description fully captures purpose, usage boundaries, return content, and sibling relationship. No gaps.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add parameter-specific detail beyond what schema provides, but it does contextualize the parameter's role by describing the overall tool scope. No extra semantics needed.

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?

Description clearly states verb (use this), resource (cherry blossom timing), and scope (cities across Japan). Explicitly distinguishes from siblings like sakura_spots and koyo_forecast.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use criteria ('when the user asks about cherry blossom timing...') and when-not-to-use instructions ('Do not use for specific parks or temples; call sakura_spots'). Also suggests alternative sibling tool.

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