get_temperature

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. 'Current' conveys that the result is a real-time or latest reading, and 'get' implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose units, freshness behavior, or any other side-effect-related details beyond the basic action.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words or filler. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter look-up tool with an output schema available. The description covers the input semantics and the result type sufficiently; return-value details are reasonably delegated to the output schema.

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 does add useful semantics by specifying that the 'city' parameter is a city name, distinguishing it from coordinates or IDs. For a single-parameter tool, this is sufficient meaningful guidance.

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 ('current air temperature') plus the input criterion ('for a city, by name'). It clearly states what the tool does and leaves no ambiguity about its scope.

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 intended use is implied by the description: call this when you need the current air temperature for a named city. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives, so the guidance is minimal.

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