get_hourly_forecast

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add context about the data source and time range, and it explains parameter defaults and limits, but it does not disclose potential errors, rate limits, or the nature of output beyond what the output schema would show. The description is informative but not exhaustive.

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 extremely concise, with the primary purpose front-loaded in a single clause followed by a compact Args list. Every sentence adds information, with no repetition or filler.

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 adequately covers the essential context: source, time range, parameters, and defaults. It could be more complete by mentioning potential error conditions or format specifics, but for a straightforward forecast lookup, it is sufficient.

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%, but the description compensates by providing an 'Args' section that explains 'location' as region name with default behavior and 'hours' as the number of time slots (default 6, max 100). This adds meaningful semantic value beyond the bare schema properties and defaults.

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's purpose: '앞으로 6시간까지의 시간별 예보를 조회한다' (retrieves hourly forecast up to 6 hours ahead), with a specific resource (hourly forecast) and source (기상청 초단기예보). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_daily_forecast and get_current_weather by specifying hourly granularity.

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 by defining the forecast scope (hourly, up to 6 hours) and parameter meaning, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings or include any exclusions. Context is present, but no direct guidance on alternatives is given.

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