Get Country Profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns a factual profile and accepts full or partial country names in any language, but it omits error behavior, ambiguity resolution for partial matches, and an explicit read-only/no-side-effect statement.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and followed by input semantics. Every element, including the field list and examples, contributes useful information without padding.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and input handling adequately. It is slightly incomplete regarding partial-name resolution and sibling routing, but it gives an agent enough to 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so well by stating that the single country parameter accepts full or partial names in any language and by giving concrete examples, though it does not clarify how ambiguous partial matches are resolved.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get a factual profile of a country') and enumerates the returned fields, making the tool's scope clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_region_details or get_map_data, so sibling differentiation is left to inference from the resource name.

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 accepted input forms and gives examples, but it provides no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no comparison to sibling tools. An agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and resource.

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