search_cities_in_country

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

The description adds a key behavioral detail: 'Resolves the country first, then searches cities within it.' However, with no annotations provided, it lacks disclosure on authentication, rate limits, or read-only nature. The added step is useful but incomplete.

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 concise sentences, each contributing uniquely. No redundant phrases or fluff. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 the complexity (8 parameters, no output schema), the description explains the main workflow but misses details like default sort order, output format, or pagination behavior. It is adequate for basic understanding but not fully comprehensive.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 purpose: searching cities using a country name instead of an ISO code. The verb 'search' and resource 'cities' are explicit, and the distinction from ISO-code-based tools (like search_cities) is hinted, though not fully explicit.

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 implies usage when a country name is available and an ISO code is not, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like search_cities. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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