Asylum applications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered and the bar is lower. The description adds the role-scoping semantics but nothing about data source (e.g. UNHCR), reporting periodicity, gaps in coverage, or time lag that would help an agent interpret results.

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?

Two compact sentences with the core metric front-loaded and the parameter distinction second. Slightly dense quote-wrapped phrasing ('role "asylum" (default)') but 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema documents all five parameters. What is missing is the routing information an agent needs in a 23-tool family: when this dataset is the right one versus asylum_decisions or refugee_population, and any caveats about availability across countries and years.

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 baseline is 3, but the description genuinely refines the 'role' enum by recasting it as applications 'filed IN' vs 'filed BY nationals abroad', which differs from the schema's 'people hosted/displaced' framing and better matches the metric. It adds little for locale and the year range, which the schema already handles.

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 names a specific metric and its unit of analysis ('Individual asylum applications lodged per year') and defines the two modes of the 'role' parameter inline, which is more precise than a generic 'get asylum data'. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with close siblings such as asylum_decisions or refugee_population, so an agent still has to infer which of the family it wants.

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?

Usage is only implied: describing what 'role' means effectively tells the agent when to use each mode, but there is no explicit statement of when to call this tool rather than asylum_decisions, refugee_population, or latest_statistics, and no prerequisites or data-coverage caveats are given.

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