CATS bus route frequencies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only content framing (frequency expressed as minutes between buses, varying by time of day), which is useful but modest and partly overlaps the output schema.

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 short sentences, zero filler. The resource and return content lead, and the disambiguation pointer follows, so the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not enumerate return fields, and the annotations carry the safety profile. What remains is that an agent gets no hint about coverage/scope (all CATS routes? live vs. scheduled?) or whether the route argument is case/punctuation sensitive, but the essentials are present.

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 single parameter is already fully documented in the schema, including the 'route number or part of name, omit to list all' semantics and an example. The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline of 3 for 100% schema coverage 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?

Names the specific resource (CATS bus routes) and the specific content returned (scheduled frequency in minutes between buses, broken down by time of day), which is far more informative than the title alone. It also distinguishes itself from find_nearby_places, which an agent might otherwise reach for when asked about buses.

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 routes the agent elsewhere when the real need is stops near an address: 'use find_nearby_places with category bus_stop'. That is a concrete alternative-plus-condition, but no reciprocal guidance on when this tool (vs. e.g. get_traffic_crashes_near or get_street_closures) is the right pick, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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