departi_search_transport

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description only adds that it returns pricing, stops, and booking links. It does not disclose other behaviors like rate limits or data freshness, but given the annotations, this is adequate.

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?

A single sentence front-loading the core purpose and output. It is efficient, though it omits important scope details (e.g., mode). No fluff.

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 tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the mode parameter's options, return value structure, pagination, or error scenarios. Annotations provide safety profile but not usage context.

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 description adds no information about parameters. With 57% schema description coverage, the tool description does not compensate for the missing parameter descriptions (e.g., passengers, return_date, departure_date). The meaning of the mode parameter is present in the schema but not reinforced in the description.

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 states it is a flight search tool, but the tool name 'search_transport' and input schema mode parameter (all/flights/ground) suggest it may also cover ground transport, creating ambiguity. It does clearly state what it returns (pricing, stops, booking links).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist (e.g., departi_search_accommodation, departi_search_experiences) but are not differentiated. No when-not-to-use conditions are mentioned.

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