List the travel modes and the destination-type taxonomy (free, no key). Use it to resolve type names to the numeric ids the other tools take. Modes are walk, bike, transit — there is no drive mode.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description provides behavioral context: it lists data (free, no key) and specifies constraints like 'no drive mode'. Does not detail rate limits or auth, but for a simple listing, this is sufficient.
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?
Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resource, immediately useful.
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?
Covers all needed context for a zero-parameter tool: what it lists, why to use it (resolve IDs), and a constraint (no drive mode). No gaps given the low complexity and lack of output schema.
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?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns (modes and taxonomy) and its purpose, beyond just the empty schema.
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 lists travel modes and destination-type taxonomy, with specific verb 'list' and resource description. Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on taxonomy, not location-based 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?
Explicitly instructs to use for resolving type names to numeric IDs for other tools. Also notes that modes are walk, bike, transit (no drive), setting expectations and guiding proper usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: blocks_in_area provides per-block travel times, isochrone gives reachable areas, nearby_pois gives times to specific POIs, walkability_summary gives times to destination categories, and the rest handle place lookup, catalog, tokens, and authentication. No two tools overlap in functionality.
Tool names mix styles: some start with verbs (find_place, get_catalog, redeem_code, request_sign_in), others are noun phrases (blocks_in_area, isochrone, nearby_pois, walkability_summary). There is no consistent verb_noun or noun pattern, making it harder for an agent to predict tool names.
With 10 tools, the server covers core travel time analysis, place lookup, authentication, and membership. The count is well-scoped for the domain—neither too few to be useful nor too many to be confusing.
The tool surface covers the major workflows: finding places, getting base data, computing travel times in various forms (blocks, isochrones, POIs, summaries), and managing API keys. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct tool for single-point travel time to arbitrary coordinates), but the set is largely complete for the stated purpose.
