GetRegions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination but lacks critical details: whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, how pagination works (e.g., default limits), error conditions, or the response format. For a tool with 10 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 appropriately brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second outlines capabilities. However, it could be more structured by explicitly listing key parameters or use cases.

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 (10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the return format, error handling, authentication needs, or detailed parameter usage. For a list-retrieval tool with extensive 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 0%, so the description must compensate for all 10 undocumented parameters. It only mentions filtering by 'id' and hints at sorting/pagination without explaining any parameter's purpose, format, or constraints. Key parameters like 'fields', 'q', '$and', '$or', 'currency_code' are completely unaddressed, leaving significant gaps.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('list of regions'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from sibling 'GetRegionsId' by indicating this returns a list rather than a single region. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other list tools like 'GetCollections' or 'GetProducts'.

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 mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination capabilities but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't specify scenarios where filtering by 'id' is appropriate or when to choose this over 'GetRegionsId' for single-region retrieval. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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