list-weather-stations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List available' without specifying what 'available' means, whether the result is filtered by current status, or what the response structure looks like (e.g., station IDs, names, coordinates). No behavioral traits are disclosed beyond the basic function.

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 with no filler or redundancy. It directly states the primary action and scope, making it highly concise and focused.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), and the description provides a clear purpose, but it lacks details about the return format and the meaning of 'available'. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally viable but leaves some ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description already explains the parameter is a filter for stations by ID, with an example. The description's phrase 'for a specific parameter' adds minimal value beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('SMHI weather stations') with a scope ('for a specific parameter'). It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list-weather-parameters, which lists parameters, and get-weather-forecast/observations, which retrieve data.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this tool might be a prerequisite for fetching forecasts or observations, nor does it explain the typical workflow of selecting stations for a parameter.

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