Latest real-time observation from the nearest AEMET weather station

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the nearest station is selected, that the latest reading is returned, and which variables are included. However, it does not mention units, staleness, error handling for invalid locations, or any data availability constraints.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and output, and the second sentence adds a succinct usage hint, making it easy to scan.

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 one-parameter tool with a rich schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, what it returns, and when to use it. Minor gaps such as units and edge-case behavior are acceptable for this simplicity level, though they would be valuable additions.

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 already documents the single 'location' parameter exhaustively, covering municipality names, INE codes, and coordinate pairs with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, which aligns with the baseline for fully schema-documented parameters.

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: finds the nearest AEMET weather station and returns its most recent reading. It also enumerates the returned variables, making the tool's purpose concrete and distinguishable from forecast, climate history, and warning siblings.

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 what's the weather right now style questions' provides a clear when-to-use signal. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the real-time observation framing is enough to route an agent correctly.

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