country_availability_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Fetch,' indicating a read operation, but fails to mention auth requirements, rate limits, or data freshness. The lack of output schema further reduces transparency.

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 10 words, achieving maximum conciseness with no redundant content. It is appropriately front-loaded with the core action.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the meaning of 'per-country availability,' return format, or any dependencies like the need to insert an edit first.

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?

With 67% schema description coverage (two of three params described in schema), the description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema. The 'track' parameter lacks a schema description, and the tool description does not compensate for this gap.

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 verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'per-country availability' with context 'for a given track within an edit.' It distinguishes from related tools like tracks_get and tracks_list which retrieve track data without availability details.

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 querying availability per country within a track edit but does not explicitly state when to use it over similar tools or mention any prerequisites like ensuring the edit is open.

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