fa_get_airport_delays

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true` and `openWorldHint: true`, covering safety and result variability. The description adds that it returns 'current' delays, which is useful but doesn't disclose behavioral traits beyond the annotations, such as pagination semantics or how `max_pages` affects results.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence that front-loads the main purpose and immediately clarifies the optional scoping. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 lack of an output schema, the description could briefly mention the structure of returned delays (e.g., delay types, codes). However, the input schema is fully covered, and the tool's read-only nature is clear from annotations, so it is mostly complete for an agent to select and invoke 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 100%, with clear descriptions for all three parameters (`id`, `max_pages`, `cursor`). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 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 tool retrieves current airport delays, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('airport delays'). It also distinguishes between fetching all delayed airports and scoping to a single airport via the `id` parameter, effectively differentiating it from sibling tools like `fa_get_airport` or `fa_get_airport_weather which serve different data.

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 contextual guidance on when to use the `id` parameter (to scope to one airport) vs omitting it (for all delays). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives for historical delay data, leaving a minor gap in exclusions.

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