tool_multi_origin_meetup

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

Discloses key behaviors: 'Read-only. No auth required. Scrapes Google Flights live... results are indicative. Combinatorial search — response time scales with number of origins × candidates.' Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and does well, though could mention more about error handling or limits.

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 well-structured: purpose first, then behavioral traits, usage guidelines, and parameter list. Every sentence adds value, and it's concise without missing key information. Front-loaded with the most important details.

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 complex tool with no output schema, the description covers input parameters, behavioral constraints, usage context, and output structure (ranked list with cost breakdown). This provides sufficient completeness for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all 6 parameters in the 'Args' section, adding meaning for each (e.g., origins as IATA codes, date format, max_results range, currency, region filter). This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: 'Find the cheapest city for a group of travelers flying from different origins to meet.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like tool_search_flights and tool_optimize_budget by specifying the multi-origin meeting scenario.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use and when-not-to-use: 'Use this when multiple travelers in different cities need to meet... Use tool_search_flights for single-origin itineraries. Use tool_optimize_budget when origin and destination are fixed.' This gives clear guidance on alternatives.

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