Warnings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default cross-border scope (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg), the active-warning filter, and that results include alert level and validity period. It does not cover edge cases like conflicting commune and coordinates, 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 two short paragraphs with no filler. The first sentence summarizes the tool, and the following sentences clarify the call modes. It avoids repeating parameter names or schema details unnecessarily.

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?

The description covers the main call patterns and outputs, and an output schema exists for return values. It could say more about what happens if both commune and coordinates are provided, or whether results are sorted or time-limited, but these are minor gaps given the strong schema coverage.

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 schema already describes all five parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the operational semantics: how the absence of commune changes the result scope, how coordinates serve as an alternative lookup, and how country applies only to the country-wide listing.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return official IRM weather warnings'. It also clarifies two distinct modes—country-wide and per-municipality—which makes the tool's purpose precise and distinguishes it from sibling tools like current_conditions or rain_forecast.

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 gives clear mode-based usage guidance: omit commune for all active warnings, pass commune or coordinates for municipality warnings, and use the country parameter for filtering the country-wide listing. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the selection between modes is unambiguous.

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