query-ticket-price

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: the tool returns fare details for all relevant stations when given a city name, prioritizes matching stations when specified but includes alternatives with better options, and warns against overly strict filtering. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by detailed usage guidelines. Every sentence adds value, though the guidelines section is somewhat lengthy. It's front-loaded with the core functionality, making it easy to understand quickly.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description does a good job explaining the tool's behavior and usage. It covers input interpretation, filtering logic, and result handling. However, it doesn't describe the output format (what '票价详情' includes) or potential error cases, leaving some gaps for a tool with this complexity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains how 'from_station' and 'to_station' parameters should be interpreted (city vs. station names), mentions the optional 'train_code' filtering capability, and implies how results are structured. This provides valuable semantic guidance not captured in the schema alone.

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: '查询火车票价信息' (query train ticket price information) with specific inputs (departure station, arrival station, date) and outputs (fare details for each train). It distinguishes from siblings like 'query-tickets' (likely broader ticket search) and 'query-transfer' (transfer options) by focusing specifically on pricing details.

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 explicit usage guidelines in the '智能筛选指南' section, detailing when to use different filtering approaches based on user input (city name vs. specific station). It also mentions supporting train code filtering, which helps differentiate from other tools like 'query-tickets' that might not have this feature.

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