get_local_weather_forecast

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only mentions that the forecast includes 'description, outlook, update', but does not disclose output structure, limitations, or any behavioral characteristics. This is minimal disclosure for a tool with no safety 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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the primary action. However, the trailing phrase 'with description, outlook, update' is vague and could be structured more clearly, but overall it is efficient.

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 large set of sibling tools and the one undocumented parameter, this description is incomplete. It does not explain the output (though an output schema exists) or provide enough context for appropriate tool selection. The description lacks necessary guidance for an agent to use it effectively.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention the 'lang' parameter at all. Since there is one parameter with a default value, the description should explain its purpose (e.g., language of the forecast), but it adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Get local weather forecast') and location ('HK'), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_current_weather or get_9_day_weather_forecast, and 'local' is ambiguous without context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling weather tools, the description gives no context, exclusions, or selection criteria, making it hard for an agent to choose correctly.

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