Blast-day weather check

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the gating thresholds (precip, wind, temp) that determine verdicts, and implies a read-only operation. It does not cover authentication or side effects, but the core behavior is transparent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes key details (thresholds). Every part 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 a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the output (forecast with verdicts) and thresholds. It does not detail the return format or verdict values, but overall it is sufficiently complete for the complexity.

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 description says 'Five-day forecast' but the input schema allows 1-14 days via the 'days' parameter, creating confusion. The parameter is not explained in the description, and schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but instead contradicts the schema.

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 it provides a five-day forecast with blast-day verdicts using company thresholds. It specifies the resource (weather for blasting) and action (forecast + verdict), distinguishing it from sibling tools like morning_digest.

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 assessing blast-day suitability via verdicts and thresholds. It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the context is reasonably clear given the tool's specificity.

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