Get Weather History

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a read-only retrieval returning time-series past conditions, but it omits authorization needs, rate limits, pagination/ordering behavior, and any implicit time bounds on 'historical' data.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and free of filler. Each sentence contributes either purpose, return shape, or a use case, though the final sentence is somewhat generic.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description gives a broad return shape ('time-series data of past weather conditions') but does not clarify time range, ordering, or how the limit parameter affects results. It is minimally adequate rather than fully complete.

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 the two parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds only that observations are for a specific measurement point and are time-series; it provides no extra syntax, format, or meaning beyond the schema baseline.

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 uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (historical weather observations) scoped to a measurement point, so the agent knows this retrieves past weather data. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling get_weather_station, but the historical/time-series framing makes the core purpose unambiguous.

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?

The phrase 'Useful for analyzing weather trends' gives an implied use case but does not state when to choose this over alternatives such as get_weather_station or list_weather_stations. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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