Stops of a bus route

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

With readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true already set, the annotation covers safety and openness. The description adds useful behavioral context by saying results are ordered and cover each direction and sub-route, but it does not discuss error cases, rate limits, or authentication.

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 two tight sentences: one front-loads the purpose and return scope, and the second gives a concrete example. There is no redundant or wasted content.

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?

For a simple read-only lookup with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it states what is returned, the ordering, and the direction/sub-route scope. Minor gaps remain around missing-route behavior and explicit relationship to bus_route_search.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters in detail. The description reinforces usage with an example for city, routeName, and direction, but adds little semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 that the tool returns the stops of a bus route in order, including per direction and sub-route. It is specific enough to distinguish this from route search or ETA tools, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 provides an example invocation but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bus_route_search or bus_eta. It implies usage for a known route but gives no explicit prerequisites, exclusions, or routing guidance.

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