get_weather

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

The verb 'Get' indicates a read-only operation with no side effects, providing behavioral transparency. However, it does not explicitly state that no modifications occur, but the action verb reasonably implies this. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does so adequately.

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, using two clear sentences for the tool purpose and two lines for parameter definitions. There is no redundant or extraneous information, and the structure is straightforward.

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 simple data-retrieval tool, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, the parameters with their valid ranges, and there are no sibling tools to differentiate. The output schema is present separately, so no explanation of return values is required.

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 description provides meaningful explanations for both parameters. 'location' is defined as a city, region, or country name, and 'forecast_days' is specified as the number of days from 1 through 7. This adds semantic richness beyond the raw schema, which only includes type and title.

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's purpose with the verb 'Get' and specifies the resource: current conditions and a weather forecast for a place. The distinction between current conditions and forecast is explicit, making the functionality unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, but there are no sibling tools listed, so differentiation is not needed. The purpose statement itself implies the appropriate context for use (retrieving weather data).

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