get-weather-forecast

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'Returns forecast data for approximately 10 days ahead,' which is useful. However, it omits details like return format, coordinate system, potential errors, or any limitations, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 sentence, immediately stating the core function and a key detail (10-day horizon). No redundant words or filler, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must compensate. It mentions forecast duration but lacks critical details like temporal granularity (hourly/daily), units, response structure, or prerequisites (e.g., valid SMHI coverage areas). This is insufficient for an agent to properly invoke and interpret the result.

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%, with clear descriptions for longitude, latitude, and category. The description adds no further parameter context (e.g., how category affects the forecast), so it provides no value beyond the schema, matching the baseline of 3.

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 function: 'Get weather forecast for a specific location from SMHI.' The verb 'get' and resource 'weather forecast' are specific, and mentioning SMHI and 'specific location' distinguishes it from siblings like 'list-weather-stations' and 'get-weather-observations.'

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 clear context by saying 'for a specific location' and 'from SMHI,' implying this is for point-based forecasts rather than station lists or observations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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