get_station_info

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

With no annotations, the description covers expected outputs (address, coordinates, facilities). It does not mention side effects, auth, or errors, but for a read-only information retrieval tool, 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?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the main purpose. It is concise, though slightly longer due to the list of facilities, but still efficient.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers key aspects of the tool (address, coordinates, facilities) and is adequate for its single-parameter simplicity.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the station_id as coming from search_station. The description adds no further parameter details beyond confirming the station is German, so baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Get full details for a German train station' and lists specific details such as address, coordinates, facilities. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_departures or search_station.

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 usage when station details are needed after obtaining a station ID. It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but context from sibling tools makes it reasonably clear.

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