Search visas by nationality

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

Describes that it returns 4-6 destinations with best-fit visa, key stats, and FAQ, and falls back gracefully if a slug isn't curated. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the schema, especially since no annotations are provided.

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?

Description is three sentences, each adding value: purpose, ideal use case, and output specifics. No superfluous words, front-loaded with key information.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the output format (4-6 destinations, best-fit visa, stats, FAQ) and error handling (graceful fallback). It could mention it is a read-only operation, but that is implied.

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 coverage of the single parameter is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. The description does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema's explanation of 'nationality adjective or country, case-insensitive'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool shows top destinations and recommended visa pathways for a given nationality. Distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'transita_compare_visas' and 'transita_visa_details' by being an ideal first stop for the question 'Where should I move?'.

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?

Explicitly says 'Ideal first stop for the question 'Where should I move?', which tells agents when to use it. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, but the use case is clear.

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