search_weather_stations

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., pagination, rate limits, or that results are searchable by partial name). It is consistent but does not enhance transparency beyond 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 focused sentence with no fluff, earning its place. However, it could be slightly expanded to include a hint about optional parameters or usage context without harming conciseness.

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 has 6 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core functionality but lacks details like order-by, radius search, or wildcard support. The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained.

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 each parameter is already well-documented. The description's mention of 'name or coordinates' loosely corresponds to parameters (query, lat/lon) but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool finds weather stations by name or coordinates, specifying the verb 'Find' and the resource 'weather stations'. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools like 'search_docs' and 'search_objects' by focusing on weather stations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as mentioning that it should be used before other tools requiring station IDs or that it is not suitable for non-weather searches. No exclusions or context are given.

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