solaredge_forecast

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the heuristic nature and lack of weather data, which is informative. However, it does not cover other behavioral aspects like data source specifics, accuracy, or potential failure modes.

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 concise with two short sentences. The key information is front-loaded: the purpose and method. Every part adds value without redundancy.

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 and the presence of an output schema, the description provides essential purpose and a parameter hint. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings and does not explain the effect of lookback_days on the forecast.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for forecast_type by listing possible values, but completely ignores lookback_days, leaving its semantics unclear beyond the schema's type and default.

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 it provides a heuristic production estimate using historical daily average without weather data, and specifies the forecast_type parameter. This distinguishes it from siblings by emphasizing the simplicity and lack of weather integration.

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 description implies usage through 'heuristic' and 'no weather data', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings for diagnosis, analysis, or live status. No alternative tools or exclusions are mentioned.

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