fa_get_flight_map

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds important behavioral context: writes PNG to disk with configurable directory, or returns inline base64. It does not contradict annotations since the write is client-side.

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 efficiently convey output, behavior, and default directory. Could be slightly more concise, but no wasted words.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return format (path or base64) and mentions PNG. It lacks error handling details but is adequate for a straightforward image retrieval tool with 6 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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the output type (PNG), return mechanism (path or base64), and default output directory logic, complementing 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 it retrieves a rendered map image (PNG) for a flight using fa_flight_id. This specific verb-resource combo distinguishes it from sibling tools like fa_get_flight_position or fa_get_flight_route.

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 output modes (disk vs inline base64) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like fa_get_flight_track for raw data. Usage context is implied but not exclusionary.

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