query-transfer

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. It usefully describes that the tool '自动分页抓取全部中转方案' (automatically paginates and fetches all transfer solutions), which adds important behavioral context about pagination and completeness. However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits, authentication requirements, 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 perfectly concise - a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and efficiently lists key parameters and behavioral characteristics. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 query tool with 6 parameters, 100% schema coverage, but no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate but minimal context. It covers the core purpose and key behavioral trait (automatic pagination), but doesn't address what the output looks like, potential error cases, or system limitations that would be helpful for an AI agent.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it mentions the three required parameters (出发站, 到达站, 日期) and the optional filters (中转站/无座/学生票), but doesn't provide additional semantic context about parameter interactions or usage nuances.

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, '抓取' - fetch) and resources ('中转换乘方案' - transfer solutions). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'query-tickets' (direct tickets) and 'query-ticket-price' (price queries) by focusing specifically on transfer/connection solutions between stations.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: when users need transfer solutions between stations with optional filters. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools (e.g., use 'query-tickets' for direct tickets without transfers).

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