get_port_weather

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (Open-Meteo, free, no API key), mentions that wind speed is in knots and provides operational thresholds, and describes the return payload. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond what the tool name alone implies.

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 concise and well-organized: purpose, source, wind-speed advisory, args, and returns. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to scan. No redundant or filler text.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential details: input format, sources, key thresholds, and return contents. It doesn't specify timezone or update frequency, but these are not critical for a weather-forecast tool and the description is sufficiently complete for effective use.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains exactly what port_name accepts: common name or UN/LOCODE, with examples. This is precise and leaves no ambiguity for the single parameter.

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 retrieves current weather and a 24-hour forecast for a port. It uses a specific verb (get) and resource (port weather), and this is distinct from sibling tools that handle port lists, vessel positions, disruptions, and congestion.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is useful, especially for assessing port operations based on wind speed thresholds. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough. The wind speed thresholds provide actionable guidance on operational impact.

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