Koleo MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only behavioral hint is 'raw' (suggesting unprocessed data), but this is not explained. No disclosure of caching, rate limits, or whether this is real-time vs cached data.

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?

Single sentence is efficiently structured and front-loaded. However, extreme brevity is inappropriate given zero schema documentation and lack of annotations; conciseness becomes underspecification.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and ambiguous relationship to tool_get_seat_stats, the description is insufficient. While an output schema exists (reducing need for return value explanation), the input parameters and 'raw' data characteristics remain undocumented.

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 has 0% description coverage (only titles). Description mentions parameter names but adds no semantic meaning—does not explain what place_type codes represent, how train_nr differs from connection_id, or expected value ranges for these integers.

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?

States specific action (Get) and resource (raw seat availability) with identifying parameters. However, fails to distinguish from sibling tool_get_seat_stats (availability vs stats distinction is unclear), and 'raw' is undefined.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (particularly tool_get_seat_stats), no prerequisites mentioned, and no exclusion criteria provided.

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