Search Airports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds 'with autocomplete' as a behavioral detail, but does not disclose additional traits like rate limits or response structure. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes key details (keyword, IATA code, autocomplete, source). No extraneous words; every part earns its place.

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 low complexity, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It conveys core functionality and the autocomplete behavior. Minor room for improvement by noting that results include location details, but the output schema likely covers that.

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?

Input schema descriptions already cover the keyword and subType parameters well (100% coverage). The description adds the hint that keyword can be an IATA code, which is a slight improvement over the schema's 'name', but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states the tool searches airports and cities by keyword or IATA code with autocomplete, specifying the resource (airports and cities) and action (search). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'amadeus.airports.nearest' and 'amadeus.airports.routes'.

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 for general search/autocomplete but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like nearest or routes. No 'when-not-to-use' guidance is provided, though sibling tool names offer some context.

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