get_forecast

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, idempotency, or output format. While it describes input behavior, it lacks details on response structure or side effects, which is adequate but minimal.

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 concise at 7 lines, front-loads the main purpose, and each sentence adds value without redundancy. 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 the tool has an output schema (not shown) and only 3 simple parameters, the description covers inputs well. However, it lacks a summary of expected output fields or any note on measurement units, which would help complete the context for an agent.

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%, so the description compensates by explaining latitude with example (e.g., 39.74 for Denver), longitude similarly, and days with a range (1 to 16). It adds meaning beyond the schema, though it could specify coordinate format (decimal degrees) explicitly.

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 gets a daily weather forecast for coordinates, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling geocode_city by stating it does not accept city names. The verb 'get' and resource 'forecast' are specific.

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 provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: to get a forecast for coordinates, and to use geocode_city first for city names. It also gives examples of coordinate formats, aiding correct invocation.

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