search_airports

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that errors are returned as formatted strings rather than exceptions, and explains query_type behavior. This is sufficient for a non-destructive lookup tool.

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 docstring format with Args/Returns/Raises is well-structured and clear, though slightly verbose. The purpose is front-loaded. Minor redundancy does not detract significantly.

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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no nested objects), and the description covers all aspects: functionality, parameter usage, error handling, and return format. No additional context is needed.

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 0%, but the description provides full meaning for all parameters: query accepts IATA or city, country is optional ISO filter, query_type controls detection mode. This far exceeds schema info.

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 'Search for airports by IATA code or city name,' which is a specific verb+resource. Among numerous aerospace calculation siblings, this lookup tool is distinct and easily differentiated.

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?

While no explicit when-to-use guidance is given, the tool's purpose is clear and siblings are unrelated. The description does explain optional filters and query types, aiding appropriate use.

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