flood_forecast

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a generic 'get forecasts' without revealing traits like data update frequency, spatial coverage, probabilistic nature, or whether the tool requires specific permissions. This is insufficient for safe and accurate agent usage.

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 concise sentence with no redundancy. While it could include more detail without bloating, it efficiently communicates the core purpose without filler.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should offer clues about the return format or data structure. It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about what the tool returns. For a tool with 7 parameters and no output specification, the description is incomplete.

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?

The input schema already describes all 7 parameters with 100% coverage, so the tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Following the rubric, with high coverage, a baseline of 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 states it retrieves river discharge and flood forecasts from the specific GloFAS system, using strong verbs 'Get' and specifying the resource and source. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like weather_forecast that handle atmospheric data.

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 versus alternatives such as weather_forecast or seasonal_forecast. The description does not specify prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate.

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