Countries with location counts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals ordering (most first), optional URL presence for browsable countries, and an important data-quality caveat about uneven Wikidata coverage. It stops short of describing fields or pagination, but there are no parameters and the output shape is implied.

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 front-loaded sentences contain the core result, ordering, URL behavior, and a caveat, with no filler. The answer to the supported question appears in the first sentence.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description fully covers the return content and interpretation caveats. An agent can predict the response and know how to treat the data without further documentation.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to explain. The description's mention of what is returned (country, count, optional URL) is the only relevant semantic content, and it is adequate.

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?

States a specific action and resource: list every country in the atlas with its filming-location count, ordered most first. It even names the exact question it answers, which distinguishes it from the sibling location-search 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 explicitly identifies the use case—'which country has the most filming locations'—so an agent knows when to call it. It does not name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, but the intended context is clear.

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