list_ski_areasList public ski areas in France for destination discovery and comparison. A ski area groups one or more ski resorts and can be used as a destination scope for apartment search. Parent regions only bundle ski areas and do not have a separate detail endpoint.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already convey read-only/idempotent behavior, and the description adds useful data-model context (ski areas group resorts; parent regions bundle but have no detail endpoint). It does not describe pagination or response format, but that is not required for a simple list endpoint.
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 three sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the core action and resource, then adds the most relevant relationship and scope details.
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 parameterless list endpoint with no output schema, the description gives enough context about what is returned (public ski areas in France) and how the result relates to other resources (resorts, apartment search, parent regions). This is complete for selection and invocation.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered by default. The description adds semantic context about what ski areas represent, which is more than sufficient given there are no parameters to document.
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 lists public ski areas in France for discovery and comparison. It distinguishes ski areas from resorts and parent regions, which differentiates it from sibling tools like list_ski_resorts and get_ski_area_detail.
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?
It provides clear context: a ski area groups resorts and can be used as a destination scope for apartment search. It also clarifies that parent regions lack a detail endpoint, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.
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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: separate tools for different entity details (accommodation, ski area, resort), distinct search vs. list operations, and specialized tools for ski pass prices and search vocabulary. No overlapping functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., get_accommodation_detail, list_ski_areas, search_apartments). Verbs are appropriately chosen (get, list, search, resolve), and there are no mixed conventions.
With 10 tools covering destination discovery, accommodation details, apartment search, pricing, and search utilities, the count is well-scoped for a ski accommodation search domain. No unnecessary tools or missing essentials.
The tool set covers the full user journey: vocabulary setup (get_search_options), keyword resolution (resolve_search_keywords), destination lists (list_ski_areas/resorts), accommodation lists (list_accommodations), detailed info (get_*_detail), apartment search with pricing (search_apartments), and ski pass pricing (get_ski_pass_prices). No obvious gaps for an information/query-focused server.