fa_get_nearby_airports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it finds airports, consistent with reads, but does not detail behavior like pagination or result format. It provides basic context but doesn't significantly enrich the annotations.

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 sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with the key action and parameters. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 has 6 parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain what is returned (e.g., airport codes, distances) or mention pagination (though schema includes cursor/max_pages). It is incomplete for a parameter-rich tool without an output schema.

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%, so parameters are already documented. The description mentions latitude, longitude, and radius, but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 finds airports near a given latitude/longitude within a radius, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fa_list_airports (which likely lists all airports) and fa_get_airport (which gets details of a single airport).

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 implies usage for geospatial airport search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like fa_search_flights or fa_list_airports. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided, though the sibling list is available.

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