shelter_forecast

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds behavioral context that this is a 'verified' and 'canonical' view, implying data quality and authoritative sourcing, which goes beyond the structured hints.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundancy. Every word contributes meaningful information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 read-only forecast tool with one parameter, the description provides sufficient context: it indicates the view's verification and canonical status. However, it does not describe the return format or specific data fields, which might be expected without an output schema.

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 100%; the single parameter 'days' has a const 14 and its own description. The tool description merely repeats the '14-day' aspect without adding further semantics or contextual detail beyond the schema.

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 provides a verified 14-day view of a canonical 30-day balance forecast. It identifies the specific resource (balance forecast) and scope (14 days), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like shelter_runway or shelter_status.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools. The description implies it is a verified canonical view, but lacks direct alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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