ticketmaster_discover_cities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'pagination', which is already evident from the schema parameters (page, per_page). It does not disclose output format, whether country is required, or any behavioral quirks. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 consists of two sentences that largely repeat each other: 'List Ticketmaster discover cities.' vs 'Lists Ticketmaster city discovery destinations...'. It is short but redundant; a single well-constructed sentence would be more effective. Still, it is not overly verbose or disorganized.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description needs to explain what the tool returns and how it behaves. It does not define what a 'discover city' is, nor does it mention the shape of the response or any usage context beyond the raw parameters. For an agent to invoke this correctly, more context is needed.

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%, as every parameter (page, country, per_page) has a description. The description's mention of 'for a country' and 'pagination' merely echoes the schema without adding additional meaning, constraints, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('Ticketmaster discover cities'), and clarifies scope with 'city discovery destinations for a country with pagination'. It reasonably distinguishes from the sibling tool ticketmaster_discover_city_events, which concerns events for a city. However, the phrase 'discover cities' is slightly non-standard, so it is not a perfect 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only mentions 'for a country with pagination', which is a parameter hint rather than usage context. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or recommended scenarios.

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