Retrieve a summary of all countries, including name, code, capital, and region, to quickly access essential geographic data for analysis or reference.
Get a summary of all countries with basic information.
Returns:
List of countries with just name, code, capital, and region
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| 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?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the returned fields and the 'all countries' scope, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, size, or that it is a non-mutating read. Adequate minimum, but thin for an unannotated tool.
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 short lines, front-loaded with purpose followed by return fields. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.
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 the description need not restate return values, and with no parameters the input side is trivially complete. The only meaningful gap is the absence of explicit differentiation from get_countries/search_countries.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; baseline 4 applies. Nothing in the description is required to interpret an input.
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 (Get) and resource (summary of all countries) and clarifies the payload is basic information limited to name, code, capital, and region. This implicitly contrasts with the fuller get_countries/get_country siblings, but no sibling is named explicitly.
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 word 'summary' and 'basic information' imply you use this when you only need a lightweight country listing and not the full record returned by get_countries. There is no explicit when-to-use statement or named alternative, so the routing guidance is only inferable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.