get_weather_radiation_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It only states the operation and date format, without disclosing whether the data is read-only, historical, or any limitations/rate limits. Minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious retrieval.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the purpose. However, it repeats the date format already in the schema, which is slightly redundant though not verbose.

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 has a clear schema and an output schema, so parameters and return values are covered. The description provides basic purpose but lacks usage context or mention of station code options, making it adequate but with clear 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 description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for date, lang, and station. The description's date format note is redundant with the schema, so it adds no new semantic value. Baseline 3 applies due to high coverage.

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 'Get weather, radiation report for HK', specifying a verb and resource scope that distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_weather and get_radiation_station_codes. It lacks detail on what 'report' includes, so not a perfect 5.

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 given on when to use this tool versus the 18 sibling tools. The only additional instruction is the date format constraint, which is more of an input requirement than usage guidance.

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