get_weather_warning_summary

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, rate limits, or what 'update' refers to. The minimal text adds little beyond the tool name.

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 compact, with a single front-loaded sentence that states the core action and scope. However, the phrase 'with messages and update' is slightly ambiguous and could be clearer, preventing a perfect score.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, output schema present), the description covers the basic purpose but omits practical context such as the difference from 'get_weather_warning_info', what 'update' means, or any usage constraints. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need for return-value detail, but overall the description leaves notable 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?

The input schema has one optional 'lang' parameter with a default, but the description does not mention or explain it. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to guess the meaning and accepted values of 'lang'.

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 fetching a weather warning summary for Hong Kong, specifying that it includes messages and an update. While it implies a distinction from sibling tools like 'get_weather_warning_info' via the word 'summary', it does not explicitly highlight that difference.

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. Given numerous sibling weather tools, the absence of any contextual direction (e.g., 'use for a high-level summary, not detailed info') leaves the agent to infer the use case.

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