Get airport departures or arrivals

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly/openWorld/idempotent already cover the safety profile), the description adds genuinely useful operational context: 2 credits per uncached call and a 2-minute cache window. That pricing and caching detail is exactly the kind of behavioral trait annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and returned fields, then a short usage note, then cost/caching. Every sentence carries information with minimal waste, though the field enumeration in parentheses is fairly dense.

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 no output schema, the description helpfully lists returned fields; annotations cover the read-only safety profile; and cost plus cache lifetime complete the picture. The only missing piece is disambiguation from the single-flight sibling tool.

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 documents airport_code, type, day, and limit. The description only echoes the type enum values, adding nothing beyond what the schema provides, which lands at the baseline for full coverage.

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 states a specific resource (upcoming departures/arrivals at an airport) and enumerates returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. However, it never distinguishes this from the sibling get_flight_status, which an agent could plausibly confuse with a per-airport board versus a single-flight lookup.

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?

"Use type 'departures' or 'arrivals'" clarifies a parameter value, not when to choose this tool over siblings like get_flight_status or search_flight_prices. Usage context is implied by the resource name but no alternatives or exclusions are stated.

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