Search Connections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the return format (schedules, times, duration, transfers, trip IDs) and implies the operation is non-destructive, which aligns with annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, completely free of fluff, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word adds value.

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 simplicity of the tool, the annotations, and the schema, the description provides all necessary context: it states the operation, the target (Swiss stations), and the return data. No output schema is needed as the description covers the key fields.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description does not add extra semantic information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents each parameter well.

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: finding train connections between two Swiss stations. It specifies the returned data (schedules, times, duration, transfers, trip IDs) and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'search_stations' and 'get_more_connections' by focusing on connections specifically.

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 for initial connection searches between stations but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools like 'get_more_connections'. The context is clear, but explicit alternatives are missing.

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