Enter a Chinese city name to receive its current weather conditions immediately. Get real-time weather data to help plan outdoor activities or travel.
查询中国城市的实时天气信息
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | Yes | 城市名称，例如：苏州、北京、上海、深圳等 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey that this is a read-style query returning real-time weather for Chinese cities. However, it does not describe what exactly is returned, whether results are limited in scope, or any edge cases, leaving some ambiguity for a tool with no output schema.
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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the operation, the resource, and the geographic scope efficiently. Every word earns its place.
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 simple one-parameter read tool, the description is mostly adequate, but it omits any distinction from the sibling get_weather_details and provides no information about the response format. Since there is no output schema, a little more context about what the returned weather information contains would improve completeness.
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%, so the schema already documents the single city parameter with examples. The description adds the context that cities are Chinese, but it does not meaningfully enrich parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.
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 ('query') and resource ('real-time weather information for Chinese cities'). It is not a tautology and gives a solid sense of what the tool does. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool get_weather_details, so the purpose is clear but not differentiated.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus get_weather_details. The description implies a simple real-time weather lookup, but it never mentions alternatives, exclusions, or conditions that would help an agent choose between the two weather tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.