search_flights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the primary source of behavioral info. It discloses the return content (flight numbers, times, stops, aircraft, fares), implying a read-only operation. It doesn't mention authentication or rate limits, but for a search tool this is acceptable.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, then states the output.

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 complexity of 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate. It states the purpose, scope, and return values, though it could mention the need for origin/destination/date, but the schema already covers that.

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 full descriptions for all 8 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics. It only describes output fields, not parameter usage.

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's function with the verb 'Search' and the resource 'flights', and narrows scope to 'American Airlines (aa.com)'. It also lists the return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_flight_details and select_flight.

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 indicates the context: searching for flights on American Airlines. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the scope is clear. Since it says 'Search', it implicitly contrasts with selection/detail tools.

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