lyon_next_departures

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only discloses that it returns immediate passages; lacks details on data freshness, error handling, required format for stop object, or any behavioral constraints beyond purpose.

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, both essential. First sentence states core purpose, second sentence clarifies scope and provides alternative. No redundancy, 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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to document parameter usage, especially the required nested object 'stop'. For a tool with 5 parameters including nested objects and 0% schema coverage, this is insufficient guidance.

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 0% and 5 parameters exist. The description provides no information about any parameter, not even the required 'stop' object. No guidance on 'at', 'line', 'direction', or 'limit'.

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?

Clearly states it returns next TCL passages at a stop/station, using specific verb 'retourne' and resource 'prochains passages TCL'. Distinguishes from sibling tool lyon_trip_options by specifying it's for immediate schedules only.

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 states scope: 'Pour les horaires immédiats uniquement' (immediate schedules only) and directs to lyon_trip_options for complete trips. Provides clear context but no other exclusions or alternatives.

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