get_rolloutsStarlink and satellite WiFi rollout progress per aircraft type: status (complete, in_progress, planned, announced), fleet percentage, and expected completion. Omit airline_code for every tracked airline.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| airline_code | No | Optional IATA airline code to filter rollouts, e.g. "UA" |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds the allowed status values, output fields, and the default behavior when omitting the parameter, which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions detected.
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?
Two sentences pack the necessary information: what the tool returns, the status enum, output fields, and filter behavior. No wasted words.
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 read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key output fields and statuses. It could mention the result is a list, but 'per aircraft type' implies grouping, making it sufficiently complete.
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 fully describes airline_code as an optional IATA filter. The description adds the important instruction to omit the parameter for all tracked airlines, adding meaning beyond the schema's baseline.
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 provides Starlink and satellite WiFi rollout progress per aircraft type, listing the specific statuses and metrics. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on rollout status, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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 provides explicit usage context for the optional airline_code parameter: 'Omit airline_code for every tracked airline.' This tells the agent when to include versus omit the filter, but it does not compare against sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but get_flight_wifi and get_wifi_facts both answer flight-level WiFi questions, creating overlap. The descriptions help by directing users to get_wifi_facts as the preferred choice, yet the redundancy remains. Other tools like get_airline_wifi vs list_airlines are differentiated by scope, but the core flight lookup is duplicated.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_airline_wifi, get_flight_wifi, get_rollouts, get_speed_stats, get_tail_info, get_wifi_facts, list_airlines, search_wifi. The verbs (get, list, search) are appropriate and uniform. No mixed naming conventions or camelCase deviations are present.
The 8 tools are well-scoped for a WiFi information server, covering airline, flight, aircraft, speed, rollout, and search capabilities without overwhelming redundancy. Each tool serves a distinct need (except the noted overlap), and the count sits comfortably in the ideal range.
The tool set comprehensively covers the in-flight WiFi domain: airline-wide info, flight-specific predictions, tail history, speed statistics, rollout progress, and free-text search. No critical operations are missing, and the inclusion of both airline and flight level lookups with fallback logic makes the surface complete for read-only information retrieval.