weather_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'interactive' but does not explain interactivity (e.g., embedded buttons, live updates). It lacks information on data freshness, caching, auth needs, or side effects. For a display tool, it could state that it renders a card or updates in real-time.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: first states the tool type, second lists displayed data. Ideal for quick parsing.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should clarify the return format (e.g., rendered HTML, structured data). It only says 'Show' but fails to specify what the agent receives. Without this, the agent cannot correctly handle the tool's output. Siblings like get_current_conditions likely return data, but this tool's return type is ambiguous.

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% and the single parameter 'city' is well-described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, earning a baseline score 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 shows an interactive weather card with specific data (air temperature, precipitation risk, 6-day forecast). It distinguishes itself from simple data tools like get_current_temperature or temperature_card by being an interactive composite display, but it could explicitly contrast with siblings like forecast_view.

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 such as forecast_view, temperature_card, or get_current_conditions. An agent is left to infer usage context without explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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