get_tide_forecast_pst

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses UTC-to-Pacific conversion, automatic PST/PDT handling, and the returned content (station info, hourly predictions, high/low tides). It does not mention any edge cases or error behavior, but for a read-only forecast tool this is reasonably 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 well-structured with a usage line, return list, and examples, but the first two sentences are largely redundant: both state that the tool retrieves tide forecasts and converts timestamps to Pacific Time. Some trimming would make it tighter.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential context: timezone behavior, return contents, station examples, and the usage condition. It does not describe the full response shape, but the bullet list gives sufficient orientation 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a few station-name examples beyond the schema, including Campbell River and Tofino, but it largely repeats what the input schema already provides and adds no deeper meaning about the parameters.

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 action and resource: retrieving tide height forecasts and converting timestamps to PST/PDT. It clearly differentiates this tool from the likely UTC-based sibling by emphasizing local BC time and the America/Vancouver timezone.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool when tide data is needed in local BC time rather than UTC. It does not name the sibling alternative or state when not to use it, but the intended context is clear and actionable.

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