price_per_km_statsСколько стоит километр на автобусе: медиана по России, самые дешёвые и дорогие регионы; с параметром region — медиана и место конкретного региона.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | No | Название региона по-русски («Татарстан») или слаг |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations present, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does explain the two behavioral modes: aggregate results without region, and regional median/rank with region. It does not disclose output format, units, or behavior for unknown or invalid regions, so transparency is adequate but incomplete.
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 one front-loaded sentence stating the core metric, the default output, and the parameterized variant with no redundant wording.
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 low-complexity tool with one optional fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description covers both invocation modes and the kind of result returned. It lacks only minor details such as exact return format or the number of regions shown, which do not block correct invocation.
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 already documents that region accepts a Russian name or slug. The description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that supplying region changes the result from nationwide aggregate to the specific region's median and rank, going 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 identifies the resource (price per kilometer by bus in Russia) and the expected outputs: nationwide median, cheapest and most expensive regions, and with a region parameter the regional median and rank. It does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools such as cheapest_destinations, so it is clear but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.
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 when to use the tool: when bus price-per-kilometer statistics are needed, either for the whole country or for a specific region. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives to prefer.
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.
Several tools overlap: search_routes and cheapest_destinations both list destinations from a city with price information, and city_departures/get_route both touch schedule details. The other tools are more distinct, but the listing-style tools create some ambiguity despite helpful descriptions.
Five tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (get_distance, get_route, get_station, find_transfer, search_routes), but cheapest_destinations, city_departures, and price_per_km_stats are descriptive noun phrases. The naming is readable and consistently snake_case, but the verb convention is not uniform.
Eight tools is well-scoped for a bus travel information server. Each tool contributes a meaningful capability around routes, pricing, transfers, stations, or statistics, without feeling bloated or overly thin.
The set covers the core traveler workflow: searching routes, finding cheap options, getting detailed schedules, handling transfers, checking distances, looking up stations, and comparing price statistics. Minor gaps exist, such as no arrival-focused query or direct city-pair comparison beyond route lookup, but they are workable.