OpenSky — Live Flights in Region

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

Annotations indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that tracking is real-time and covers position, altitude, speed, and heading, and mentions optional filters like on_ground_only and response_format. No contradictions, but could mention data source limitations (ADS-B coverage).

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 concise, with a clear purpose sentence followed by argument list and practical examples. The examples add useful context but slightly increase length; overall well-structured.

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?

With 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides usage examples but does not describe the return format or fields beyond listing altitude, speed, etc. It lacks details on pagination or data completeness, leaving the agent partially uninformed.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description lists parameter names and provides example bounding box values, which adds some meaning but does not explain each parameter's specific purpose or constraints (e.g., limit maximum, on_ground_only effect).

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 provides live ADS-B flight tracking for a geographic bounding box, with specific data fields. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_flights_by_country' which focuses on country-level filtering.

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 includes example bounding boxes for India and Europe, implying usage for regional tracking. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like 'get_flights_by_country' or when not to use it.

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