Aggregated stats for one airport: total departures, top destination airports, top aircraft, and departures by year. Use the ICAO code (4 letters, e.g. WADD for Bali).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| byYear | Yes | ||
| airport | Yes | ||
| topAircraft | Yes | ||
| uniqueAircraft | Yes | ||
| topDestinations | Yes | ||
| totalDepartures | Yes | ||
| uniqueDestinations | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / airport / anyOfPrevious value: -[
- {
- "additionalProperties": {},
- "properties": {
- "continent": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "elevation_ft": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "number"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "gps_code": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "home_link": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "iata_code": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "id": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "ident": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "iso_country": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "iso_region": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "keywords": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "latitude": {
- "type": "number"
- },
- "local_code": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "longitude": {
- "type": "number"
- },
- "municipality": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "name": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "numericId": {
- "type": "number"
- },
- "scheduled_service": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "timezone": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "wikipedia_link": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "id",
- "numericId",
- "ident",
- "type",
- "name",
- "latitude",
- "longitude",
- "elevation_ft",
- "continent",
- "iso_country",
- "iso_region",
- "municipality",
- "scheduled_service",
- "gps_code",
- "iata_code",
- "local_code",
- "home_link",
- "wikipedia_link",
- "keywords",
- "timezone"
- ],
- "type": "object"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]New value: +[
+ {
+ "additionalProperties": {},
+ "properties": {
+ "continent": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "elevation_ft": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "gps_code": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "home_link": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "iata_code": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "ident": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "iso_country": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "iso_region": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "keywords": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "latitude": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "local_code": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "longitude": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "municipality": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "numericId": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "scheduled_service": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "timezone": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "wikipedia_link": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "numericId",
+ "ident",
+ "type",
+ "name",
+ "latitude",
+ "longitude",
+ "elevation_ft",
+ "continent",
+ "iso_country",
+ "iso_region",
+ "municipality",
+ "scheduled_service",
+ "gps_code",
+ "iata_code",
+ "local_code",
+ "home_link",
+ "wikipedia_link",
+ "keywords",
+ "timezone"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+]Output schema / properties / topAircraft / items / properties / icaoType / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / topAircraft / items / properties / icaoType / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / topAircraft / items / properties / ownop / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / topAircraft / items / properties / ownop / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / topAircraft / items / properties / reg / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / topAircraft / items / properties / reg / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / topDestinations / items / properties / city / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / topDestinations / items / properties / city / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / topDestinations / items / properties / country / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / topDestinations / items / properties / country / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds nothing further about behavior — no note on freshness of aggregation, whether counts are complete, or how the aggregates are scoped — so it neither contradicts nor enriches the annotations much.
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, no filler. The resource and its aggregates are front-loaded, and the parameter note follows. Every clause carries information an agent needs.
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?
With one required parameter, full annotations and an output schema, the definition needs only to identify the resource and the input format, both of which it does. The main residual gap is the absence of any hint about how this differs from overlapping siblings such as top_routes.
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 must carry the parameter, and it does: it specifies ICAO code, 4 letters, and gives a concrete example (WADD for Bali). The '4 letters' part duplicates the schema's ^[A-Z]{4}$ pattern, but the ICAO-vs-IATA distinction and the example are genuinely additive.
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 names the resource (one airport) and enumerates exactly what is aggregated: total departures, top destination airports, top aircraft, departures by year. That distinguishes it from siblings like Flight_airport_arrivals_by_country and Flight_airport_arrival_trend, though it never explicitly names an alternative.
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?
Usage is only implied: 'Aggregated stats for one airport' suggests investigation/profiling of an airport, and the second sentence is a parameter instruction rather than a when-to-use rule. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over Flight_top_routes or Flight_airport_visits, which overlap on similar data.
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.