get_tide_forecast

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses hourly intervals, UTC start time, partial-match search, and the structure of returned data (station info and predictions). It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but for a read-only forecast tool this is adequate.

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 moderately detailed but well-structured with a clear opening, a behavior explanation, and a return section. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and avoids excessive fluff, though it could be slightly more concise.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: time range, timezone, data frequency, station selection, and return format. It lacks details on error handling or station-not-found behavior, but overall is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 station_name, but the description adds value by explicitly noting partial matching support and providing concrete examples like 'Point Atkinson' and 'Victoria'. This goes beyond the schema's basic description.

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 retrieves 7-day tide height forecasts for a Canadian monitoring station, with a specific verb and resource. It is distinguishable from list_stations and plot_tide_forecast, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_tide_forecast_pst, leaving some ambiguity.

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 retrieving tide forecasts but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like get_tide_forecast_pst (which likely differs by timezone). It gives examples of station names but lacks when-not-to-use instructions.

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