get_current_weather

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what data is returned (temperature, humidity, wind, precipitation, cloudiness) but doesn't mention important behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication requirements, data freshness, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 perfectly concise and well-structured. Two sentences efficiently convey the purpose and return data. The first sentence states what the tool does, and the second enumerates the returned data types. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 (1 parameter, no annotations, but with output schema), the description is reasonably complete. The output schema will handle return value documentation, so the description appropriately focuses on purpose and data types. However, it could benefit from more behavioral context given the lack of annotations.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and only 1 parameter, the description doesn't provide any specific information about the 'location' parameter beyond what's implied by the tool's purpose. However, for a single-parameter tool with clear purpose, the baseline is 4 as the description adequately conveys what information is needed without needing detailed parameter documentation.

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 specific action ('Aktuelles Wetter für einen Ort abrufen' - retrieve current weather for a location) and resource (weather data). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on current conditions rather than forecasts (get_weather_forecast), alerts (get_weather_alerts), or station finding (find_weather_station).

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 for current weather data, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose differentiates from siblings, there's no explicit guidance about when to choose this over get_weather_forecast or other weather-related tools.

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