fetch_ac_from_faa

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It indicates a live web fetch but does not mention potential network delays, rate limits, or error conditions. While not contradictory, it lacks depth on behavioral traits like authentication or expected response time.

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 sentences with no redundant words. The purpose and usage guidelines are front-loaded and efficiently stated.

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 low complexity and good schema coverage, the description is minimal. It lacks explicit mention of output format (e.g., what 'details' includes) and does not specify behavior on failure (e.g., if AC not found). This leaves some gaps for a complete 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the parameter well with examples. The description adds no further semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Fetch details', specifies the resource 'FAA Advisory Circular', and identifies the source 'directly from the FAA website'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_circulars by noting use for recent ACs not in local database.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: 'for ACs that may be too recent for the local database' and 'to verify current status of any AC'. This implies when not to use (if AC is in local database and no verification needed), providing clear decision context.

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