adsb_ladd

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. However, it fails to mention the scope (e.g., global vs. regional) or the timeliness of the data, which are critical behavioral constraints for a live listing tool.

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 a single, highly efficient sentence that front-loads the necessary context (FAA/LADD) without any waste.

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?

While clear about the data type, the description lacks functional completeness for a listing tool. An AI agent needs to know the scope (geographic boundaries) or operational status of the 'LADD list' before confidently invoking the tool.

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 schema contains zero parameters, leading to the baseline score of 4. The description adds no necessary semantic meaning beyond naming the resource.

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 identifies the resource ('Aircraft on FAA's LADD list'), providing specific regulatory context that distinguishes this tool from generic aircraft querying tools like `query_aircraft`.

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 usage is implied by the tool's specific name (LADD list) rather than being explicitly guided against alternatives. It is a highly niche tool, so the usage is inherently limited to requests about this specific regulatory list.

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