Flight Ticket MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it indicates this is a query/search operation, it doesn't describe what '可用航班信息' (available flight information) includes, whether there are rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or what happens when no flights are found. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that efficiently communicates the core functionality. Every word earns its place with no redundant information, making it front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 complexity of flight search (3 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what information is returned, how results are structured, whether there are sorting/filtering options, or error conditions. For a search tool with multiple sibling alternatives, more contextual information is needed.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the three parameters (departure city, destination city, departure date) but provides no additional semantic context beyond their names. No format requirements (e.g., date format, city naming conventions), examples, or constraints are given, leaving parameters largely undocumented.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('查询' - query/search) and resources ('航班信息' - flight information), and identifies the key parameters (departure city, destination city, departure date). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'getFlightInfo' or 'getTransferFlightsByThreePlace', which appear to be related flight search 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons with sibling tools like 'getFlightInfo' or 'getTransferFlightsByThreePlace', leaving the agent with no context for tool selection.

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