Asylum applications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read and potentially incomplete data. The description adds that data is 'per year' and the role semantics, but does not elaborate on behavior like data freshness or handling of missing years. With annotations covering the safety profile, the additional contribution is moderate.

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 two sentences long, directly stating the tool's purpose and the key role distinction. Every word is necessary; no fluff or repetition.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the core functionality (yearly data, role selection) adequately. Minor gaps: no mention of how openWorldHint affects results or that output schema exists, but overall sufficient given the complexity.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description re-emphasizes the role default and meaning, but adds little beyond the schema's own descriptions (e.g., year range defaults are only in schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Individual asylum applications lodged per year' which identifies the resource (asylum applications) and the verb (lodged per year). It distinguishes between two roles ('asylum' vs 'origin'), which helps differentiate from sibling tools like asylum_decisions or refugee_population.

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 explains when to use each role ('asylum' for applications filed IN the country, 'origin' for filed BY nationals abroad), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly guide when to choose this tool over siblings like 'asylum_decisions' or 'trend_analysis', leaving room for ambiguity.

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