Iranian destinations

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

Beyond the read-only, non-destructive annotations, it discloses that results are ordered biggest-first and that counts are Eghamat24's own totals rather than result-count estimates. The exact metric behind "biggest" remains unspecified, but the added ordering and provenance context are useful.

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 front-loads the core listing behavior, then gives the downstream use and finally ordering and count provenance. All three short paragraphs contribute distinct, actionable information without 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?

For a simple three-parameter discovery tool, the description and schema together cover selection, invocation, output content, ordering, and the format expected by downstream tools. Although there is no output schema, the description supplies the important return semantics without needing a full response-shape specification.

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?

With 67% schema coverage, the schema already explains `kind` and `query`, while the description mainly clarifies the downstream city output with slug examples. "Biggest destinations first" indirectly helps interpret `limit` as taking a top-ranked subset, but it never explicitly explains that otherwise undocumented parameter.

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 description uses a specific verb and resource—listing Eghamat24 destinations with hotel and stay counts—and then clarifies its role as a city-slug discovery step. Naming eg_search and eg_deals as consumers distinguishes it from those sibling 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?

It explicitly says to use the tool to obtain the English `city` value for eg_search and eg_deals, providing a clear workflow. It does not add exclusions or explain when province mode is preferable, so the guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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