list_late_trips

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects and read-only nature. It does not state whether the tool modifies data, what happens with missing parameters, or define 'usable trips'. Potential side effects and data safety are ambiguous, given the lack of explicit read-only or mutation statements.

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 brief and well-structured, consisting of two sentences that introduce the main behavior and a follow-up usage hint. It is concise without unnecessary fluff, though it omits important details that could be added without redundancy.

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?

The description provides only minimal context: it references a prior tool and vaguely mentions 'usable trips' and 'late'. It does not explain the output structure, the meaning of parameters, or how to interpret results. Given the schema has 6 parameters and no output schema is shown, the description is insufficient for full understanding.

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 only partially explains include_on_time (late vs all trips) but provides no meaning for route, start_date, end_date, limit, or late_threshold_min. The schema gives titles but no descriptions, and the description adds minimal value for most parameters, leaving coverage low.

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 lists usable trips that are late, with a conditional behavior based on include_on_time. The verb 'list' and resource 'usable trips' are specific, and it references route_otp_summary for context, avoiding tautology. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other sibling tools beyond the usage hint.

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 after route_otp_summary to drill into trips, providing some situational context. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare alternatives, so the guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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