List countries or cities

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

The annotations already indicate readOnly and openWorld behavior, and the description adds a transparent note about returning 404 for regular tokens. This discloses a real limitation beyond the annotations, enhancing 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 brief and to the point, using only two sentences. It conveys the core purpose and a caveat without unnecessary verbosity, though the 404 note could be more directly integrated.

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 description gives enough context for a simple listing tool, but it does not specify the output format or expected behavior beyond the 404 caveat. It is adequate for basic use but leaves some ambiguity about return data and edge cases.

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?

The schema provides a description for country_id and an enum for kind, but the tool description adds no additional explanation of parameters. Since schema coverage is only 50%, the description should compensate by clarifying parameter meaning or usage, but it does not.

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 identifies the tool as a geography reference for listing countries/cities, which distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on threads, workspaces, and projects. The mention of a 404 status is a minor caveat but does not obscure the primary purpose.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only notes that the tool is kept for completeness and may be restored, but does not direct the agent to prefer other tools or specify conditions for use.

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