radio_countries

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

No annotations are provided, and the description adds no behavioral details beyond the basic listing. It does not disclose completeness, pagination, rate limits, or any special constraints.

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 that is concise and front-loaded. It contains no unnecessary words and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

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?

For a simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It could mention the return format, but the core purpose is clear. The lack of output schema does not hinder understanding.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter info. The schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description is fine and adds marginal value over the schema.

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 lists all countries with radio stations. It uses a specific verb 'list' and resource 'countries', and distinguishes from sibling tools like radio_by_country which filter by a specific country.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like radio_search or radio_by_country. The description only states what it does without context for selection.

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