ibge_paises

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent. The description adds value by specifying it's a live GET against the public IBGE Países API and returns Markdown, confirming the behavioral traits.

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?

Very concise yet complete: a single introductory sentence, bullet features, clear examples. No redundant phrases; every sentence provides value.

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?

Covers all main operations, parameter usage, and output format. Output schema exists (not shown here) but description still explains return is Markdown. Minor gaps: no mention of error handling or rate limits, but adequate for a country query tool.

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 covers all 5 parameters. Description adds context: ISO-ALPHA-2 vs M49 codes, 'indicadores' format (separated by |), and examples tying parameters to use cases.

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 it queries international country data via IBGE. It lists specific features (list all, details, search, filter) and distinguishes from siblings focused on states, municipalities, etc., making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit usage scenarios with examples for each tipo, region values, and country code format. While it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, the sibling names and context make differentiation clear.

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