Obtener Aeropuertos de Colombia

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive traits. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by specifying the return format (list with name, city, type, IATA/OACI codes) and providing usage examples, which helps the agent understand output structure and practical application.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized, with a clear purpose statement, parameter explanation, return details, and usage examples. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, and it is front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter), rich annotations covering safety and behavior, and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains what the tool does, how to use it, what it returns, and provides examples, compensating adequately for the lack of 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 the schema already fully documents the optional department_id parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format details or examples of department IDs. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Obtiene la lista de aeropuertos de Colombia') and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on airports rather than cities, departments, or other Colombian entities. It specifies the resource (airports) and scope (Colombia) explicitly.

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 clear context for when to use it ('Puede filtrar por departamento'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings. It implies usage for airport queries in Colombia, which is helpful but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to tools like get_cities or search_colombia.

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