zurich_water_weather

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying the real-time nature, 10-minute interval, and station-specific measurements. No contradictions with annotations.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose, then details stations, interval, and measurements. There is minor redundancy with a 'Returns' line that repeats content. Overall efficient but could be slightly 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?

The tool is simple with 3 parameters, annotations cover read-only safety, and there is an output schema. The description provides sufficient context for a real-time data retrieval tool, including what data is returned. No major gaps given the tool's 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% according to context, meaning the description does not add meaningful information about parameters beyond what is in the schema. The tool description mentions measurements but does not explain parameters like limit, format, or station. Given low schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 real-time weather data from the Zurich water police, specifying stations (Tiefenbrunnen, Mythenquai), interval (10 minutes), and measurements (water/air temperature, wind, water level, precipitation, etc.). It distinguishes itself from siblings like zurich_weather_live by focusing on water-specific weather.

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 water-related weather data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like zurich_weather_live. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Usage is implied but not instructed.

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