Get Nearby Airports

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

Beyond annotations like readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, the description discloses that the underlying list is the entire live world dataset (85,249 airports), that distance filtering always runs before pagination, and that an empty radius result is a true negative. This preempts common misconceptions and goes well beyond what annotations alone convey.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, and each subsequent sentence adds non-redundant behavioral context about data scope, false negatives, and pagination. It is appropriately sized for the complexity of the behavior it clarifies and contains 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?

Given the rich input schema, output schema, and annotations, the description covers all essential operational concerns: the spatial filter, default position behavior, data source scope, result ordering, and pagination guarantees. No critical usage information needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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 input schema already documents every parameter (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantic value by explaining that the radius is interpreted over a complete worldwide list and that filtering happens before pagination, clarifying the behavior of radius_nm, offset, and limit beyond their schema descriptions.

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 first sentence, 'List airports near a point, nearest first,' names a specific verb, resource, and ordering. The second sentence adds the algorithmic basis (great-circle distance over SimConnect's airport facility list), making the purpose unmistakable and distinct from sibling facility search tools.

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 gives clear operational context: searches are relative to a given or current position, and an empty result genuinely means no airport exists within radius rather than a SimConnect loading failure. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the domain is specific enough that no competing sibling tool is implied.

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