Avisos meteorológicos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the data source (AEMET CAP), the types of warnings covered, and the return components, giving users a good sense of what to expect. It does not detail output shape or error behavior, but that is reasonable for a read-only query tool.

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, information-dense sentence that elegantly conveys the purpose, scope, output fields, and data source without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is quite complete: it specifies what is returned and the geographic scope. It falls just short of explicitly stating the exact return format, but the mentioned attributes sufficiently convey the expected data structure.

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 the `area` parameter fully documented including examples and valid values. The tool description only adds that area refers to a Spanish autonomous community, which provides marginal additional context. Baseline 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 clearly identifies the tool as providing current meteorological warnings for a Spanish autonomous community, including specific attributes like level, affected area, and period. This distinguishes it from sibling tools involving forecasts and 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 implies the tool is used to retrieve active warnings for an autonomous community, making the usage context clear. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the distinction from siblings is apparent.

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