search_cities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that matching is partial and the return is a list, but says nothing about result limits, pagination, performance, or what happens when name is left at its empty default – an important behavioral question for a search endpoint.

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?

Short and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first sentence and Args/Returns following. The Args block slightly duplicates the sentence above but stays within useful bounds.

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?

With an output schema present, the Returns line need only be minimal, and both parameters are explained. The remaining gap is behavior at default/empty inputs, which neither annotations nor description cover.

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% (only titles/defaults), so the description does the work: it clarifies that name allows partial matches and that country_code is a two-letter code, which is exactly the semantics the schema lacks. It doesn't address the empty-string defaults.

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+resource ("Search for cities") plus the filtering dimension (country). It is distinguishable from list-style siblings such as get_cities_in_country, though it never names those siblings 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?

Implies usage: search when you have a name fragment, filter by country optionally. But with siblings like get_cities_in_country and search_countries in the same family, the description offers no explicit rule for choosing among them and no exclusions.

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