humanitarian_displacement

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It does not disclose if the tool is read-only, any rate limits, data freshness, or response format. For a retrieval tool, critical behavioral traits are missing.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. Every part is relevant and earns its place.

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 a single optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. It provides the source and categories but omits what the output looks like, data format, or time range. It is adequate but could be more informative.

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% (year has a description 'Year for statistics'), so baseline 3 applies. The tool description adds no further semantics about the parameter, such as valid range or behavior when omitted. It barely adds value beyond the schema.

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 'Global displacement statistics — refugees, IDPs, asylum seekers from UNHCR,' specifying the resource (displacement statistics), source (UNHCR), and categories (refugees, IDPs, asylum seekers). It distinguishes from sibling tools like humanitarian_camps and pop_displacement by naming the specific data and source.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as pop_displacement or humanitarian_camps. The description implies use for UNHCR displacement stats but does not provide conditions, exclusions, or comparisons to siblings.

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