get_provinces

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses required and optional parameters but does not describe output structure, error behavior, or any side effects. With an output schema present but not referenced, the description misses an opportunity to summarize return format.

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?

Extremely concise: one-line purpose, a usage hint, then structured Args list. Every sentence adds value with no redundant or vague language.

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 listing tool with 3 parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and usage context. It could mention the output shape (list of province codes/names), but given the output schema existence, this is a minor gap.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds crucial semantics: explains country_code as ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 with examples, region_code as coming from get_regions, and language_code as display language with examples. This goes well beyond the bare schema which only has titles and types.

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 clearly states verb 'List' and resource 'provinces for a country' with optional region filter. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying how the returned codes are used in get_cities or search_businesses, making the tool's role in the ecosystem clear.

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?

Provides explicit usage context (list provinces, optionally filtered by region) and hints at next steps (using codes in other tools). However, lacks an explicit statement of when NOT to use this tool or direct comparison with siblings like get_cities or get_regions.

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