Compare countries

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies the domain (displacement), role option, and normalization. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, which are consistent. The description does not contradict annotations and adds useful detail.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary information.

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 of 6 parameters and an existing output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality and defaults. Minor omissions like data source mention are acceptable as schema covers return values and parameters.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions already present. The description adds context for defaults (e.g., refugees, last 10 years) but does not significantly enhance understanding of individual parameters beyond what the schema provides. 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 the action ('compare'), resource ('displacement metric'), and scope ('2–5 countries over a year range'). It also specifies defaults and normalization, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that typically focus on single-country or single-metric analysis.

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 provides defaults and the option for normalization, giving context on typical usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or point to alternative tools for other scenarios, so it falls short of explicit guidance.

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