Get Route Detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the shape of what comes back (sections with platforms/transfers plus per-seat-class pricing), which is useful context, but it omits that prices depend on the tariffs/currency parameters and says nothing about failures when a route has no through-fare.

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 dense sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler; every clause (sections, vehicle types, platforms, transfers, per-seat-class pricing) contributes information.

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?

Six parameters, three required, with an output schema and annotations already supplied, so return values and safety needn't be in the description. Still, for a pricing/segment tool the description should note that tariffs and currency alter the price output and that station-level (not city-level) ids are mandatory, both of which it leaves entirely to the schema.

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%, including enum values for lang, currency, the tariffs list format, and the explicit 'station, not city' warnings on the station ids. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the schema carries the whole burden and the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('route's sections') plus the content returned: trains/buses, lines, platforms, transfers, and price per seat class. This is clearly distinct from search_routes (which finds routes) and get_ticket (which returns a purchased ticket), though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no stated prerequisite that route_id/from_station_id/to_station_id must first come from search_routes. Only the input schema hints at that dependency; the description itself gives the agent nothing about choosing between this and get_ticket or search_routes.

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