seasonal_forecast

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it returns seasonal forecasts but omits that it can also include past_days data (retrospective), the distinction between daily and 6-hourly 'hourly' data, and any data source or update frequency. The agent is left uninformed about key operational traits.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, missing key scoping information.

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 12 parameters, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the range of output variables, the difference between daily and hourly intervals, the use of date parameters, or how 'forecast_days' maps to months. The tool's full functionality is obscure.

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 75% (high), establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as clarifying the function of 'hourly' (6-hourly) or the meaning of 'forecast_days' increments. It does not compensate for the 25% of params without schema descriptions.

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 clear verb ('Get') and specifies the resource ('long-range seasonal forecasts for temperature and precipitation') with a time scope ('up to 9 months ahead'). However, it underrepresents the full range of variables available (e.g., wind, humidity, soil moisture), which could mislead an agent about capability. It distinguishes from short-range forecast tools, but not explicitly from climate projections.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like weather_forecast (short-term) or climate_projection (longer-term). There are no usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions stated, leaving the agent to infer context.

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