Compare Countries

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description's safety burden is low. It adds a useful behavioral detail by clarifying that the comparison uses the latest non-empty value, but it does not explain edge cases like countries with no data or ordering of results.

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 a single, tight sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and includes the most important constraints, making it highly scannable.

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?

The read-only and idempotent annotations cover safety, and an output schema presumably documents the return structure. The main missing piece is explicit guidance on alternative tools, but for a simple two-parameter read-only comparison, the definition is reasonably complete.

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 carry parameter meaning, but it only restates 'indicator' and '2 to 20 countries' without explaining formats, code conventions, or value domains. The schema regexes help, but the description adds little beyond what parameter names already imply.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Compare') and clearly defines scope: 'latest non-empty value for one indicator across 2 to 20 countries.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_country_profile or get_indicator_data, which imply different operation shapes.

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 implies usage context via 'across 2 to 20 countries' and 'one indicator,' but it never explicitly contrasts this tool with siblings such as get_indicator_data or find_countries. No when-not-to-use guidance is given, so an agent would need to infer routing.

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