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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and open-world behavior are covered. The description adds that the directory is 'public' and lists the data categories returned, but with an output schema present this content is largely redundant rather than additive behavioral context.

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 tightly written sentences: the first front-loads the resource and contents, the second handles the dependency on the sibling tool. No 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?

For a single-parameter, read-only directory lookup with an output schema and clear annotations, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing. The dependency on balenciaga_store_countries is called out.

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 100% and the parameter's enum of documented country codes is fully specified in the schema. The description contributes nothing about the country parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: Balenciaga's physical-store directory for one country, and enumerates what it contains (addresses, coordinates, phone numbers, opening hours, service flags). It also implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling balenciaga_store_countries, which serves a different purpose.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to balenciaga_store_countries to obtain valid country codes, which is a concrete prerequisite for calling this tool. It gives context for use but stops short of stating when-not to use the tool or other alternatives.

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