get_weather_forecast_content_israel

Does 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 mentions the return value (cleaned text or error) but does not disclose side effects, safety (read-only), or any operational constraints such as the need for a loaded page. This leaves significant 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 two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the core purpose and includes a return-value note. 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?

The tool has no parameters and a plausible output schema, and the description states the return behavior. However, it lacks workflow context: it does not explain how it fits with the sibling tools or what conditions must be met before invoking it (e.g., page must be open). This leaves a gap for an agent deciding when to call it.

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?

There are zero parameters in the input schema, and schema coverage is 100% (empty). No parameter explanation is needed, and the baseline for zero parameters is 4. The description adds no param semantics, but none are required.

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 ('extracts and cleans') and identifies the resource ('weather forecast content from the page'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like open/enter/select weather forecast tools. It is concise and unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool or how it relates to the sibling tools. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., 'after opening the page') or explicitly tell the agent when to prefer this over alternatives. The phrase 'from the page' implied a precondition but is not made explicit.

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