zurich_tourism

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be safe and read-only. The description adds a return format (Markdown list) but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise: four sentences that front-load the core purpose, list supported categories, mention data format, and state the return type. No filler or repetition.

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 tool is a straightforward search with clear categories and filters, the description and annotations together provide adequate context. An output schema is indicated as present, and the description notes the return format. Slightly lacking in usage guidance for specific categories, but overall satisfactory.

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 description does not elaborate on any of the five parameters (format, category, language, max_results, search_text) beyond what the input schema already provides. Schema descriptions are detailed, but the free-form description adds no extra meaning for parameters.

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 searches (Sucht) for attractions, restaurants, hotels, and events via the Zurich Tourism API. It lists specific categories and uses a German verb that precisely describes the action. Among siblings, it is distinctly about tourism, not other city data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or which sibling tools might be more appropriate for specific tasks (e.g., parking or air quality queries).

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