get_short_term_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 only indicates a read-only 'retrieval' action, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as data update frequency, geographic coverage, units, or any limitations. For a simple read operation, this is minimal and lacks useful context.

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 directly states the action, resource, and scope with no filler or redundancy. It is efficiently 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 low-complexity tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and time range. However, it lacks any mention of forecast intervals, units, or data source, and the absence of annotations leaves some behavioral gaps. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 must compensate. It mentions 'specific coordinates' which generically relates to both lon and lat, but does not clarify coordinate format, order, allowable ranges, or other constraints. The parameter names themselves are self-explanatory, but the description adds little beyond that.

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 a specific action ('조회합니다' - retrieves) on a specific resource ('단기(3~5일) 예보' - short-term 3-5 day forecast) with a clear scope ('특정 좌표' - specific coordinates). The time range '3~5일' distinguishes it from nowcast siblings, making the purpose 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 implies usage for short-term (3-5 day) forecasts at given coordinates, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of the nowcast siblings or provide exclusions. The context is clear but guidance is only implicit, not direct.

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