departi_search_transport

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it sources flights across multiple providers (Duffel + Travelpayouts), states prices are indicative requiring booking via the link, and clarifies empty list behavior. This complements the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations without contradiction.

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 paragraph of moderate length (roughly 100 words). It covers all essential points without excessive verbosity. While front-loading could be slightly improved by placing the core action sentence first, it is already clear. Minor structural improvement possible, but overall 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 7 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description adequately explains the tool's behavior, return format, data sources, and edge cases (empty list). It doesn't mention pagination or result limits, but these are not critical for a simple search tool. Fairly complete for the use case.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., origin/destination formats, cabin class enum, date formats). The return format list is helpful but relates to output, not parameter meaning.

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 'Searches flights between two places and returns a ranked list of options' with specific details (carrier, price, etc.). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools departi_search_accommodation and departi_search_experiences, which cover different travel needs.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use for "how do I get from A to B by air"' and provides negative guidance: 'Ground/rail/bus is not offered through this tool.' It also names specific alternative tools for accommodation and experiences, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use boundaries.

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