Retrieve all countries in a specified region (e.g., Europe, Asia, Africa) to explore geographic groupings and regional data.
Get all countries in a specific region.
Args:
region: Region name (e.g., "Europe", "Asia", "Africa")
Returns:
List of countries in the region
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only lookup but does not state that, nor does it describe behavior for an unrecognized region name, case sensitivity, or result ordering/size.
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?
Front-loaded with the core purpose in one sentence and no wasted prose. The "Returns" block is largely redundant given a full output schema, which slightly dilutes an otherwise tight docstring.
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 one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description covers the basics and gives example inputs. It still leaves gaps around valid region values and how this differs from sibling lookup tools, which matters given how many similar siblings exist.
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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single undocumented region parameter. It does add value with example values ("Europe", "Asia", "Africa"), but omits whether the name is case-sensitive or must match get_all_regions output, leaving the compensation partial.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("Get all countries in a specific region"), so an agent immediately knows the operation. However, it offers no differentiation from close siblings like get_countries or search_countries, which an agent could easily confuse for the same task.
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 never says when to use this tool instead of get_countries, search_countries, or get_subregions_in_region, all of which appear in the sibling list. There is no condition, prerequisite, or exclusion given, so selection is left entirely to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.