numbeo_cost_of_living_country

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions data is 'Credential-free public Numbeo data', indicating no auth needed, but does not disclose rate limits, freshness, or other behavioral traits. Adequate but not thorough.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, no redundancy. Every sentence provides distinct information without 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?

Given the simple tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description fully explains what the tool returns (itemized prices and city indices) and data source, making it complete for agent invocation.

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 100% for the single parameter 'country'. The description adds value by noting the country name must be 'as Numbeo spells it', implying exact spelling matters, which is beyond the schema's definition.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'Numbeo country's cost-of-living prices', and specifies the output includes aggregate itemized prices and city indices, uniquely identifying this tool from siblings like numbeo_cost_of_living_city.

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 for country-level overview with city indices, but does not explicitly guide when to use this vs. alternatives like numbeo_cost_of_living_city or ranking tools. No direct comparison or exclusions are provided.

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