country_region_places

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states a read operation ('Get') without disclosing behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, pagination (implied by limit/offset but not explained), error handling, or what 'places' entails (e.g., cities, towns). It lacks critical context for safe and effective use.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste—'Get the places in the given region'—front-loaded and appropriately sized for its purpose. Every word earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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 (15 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'places' are, how results are returned, or behavioral aspects like pagination or errors. For a tool with rich filtering options, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 schema already documents all 15 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond implying filtering by region, which is covered by required parameters 'countryid' and 'regionId'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get the places in the given region' states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('places'), but it's vague about what qualifies as a 'place' (cities, towns, etc.) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'country_places' or 'places'. It specifies 'region' but lacks detail on region scope versus other tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'country_places', 'places', or 'admin_divisions'. It mentions 'region' but doesn't clarify context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving usage ambiguous relative to sibling tools.

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