High speed rail train stops

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and data-source nature are covered. The description adds that the result is the full stop sequence with times, but says nothing about ordering, transfer notes, or data freshness.

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, front-loaded with the core behavior and followed by a concrete input example. Nothing redundant.

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 2-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description conveys what comes back (all stops plus times) adequately. Minor gaps remain around ordering and date defaults, but those are largely covered by 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description earns extra credit by showing that trainNo tolerates leading zeros ("0803" or "803"), a behavioral detail the bare pattern ^\d{1,4}$ does not make obvious.

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 and resource: 'Every stop of one THSR train on a day' with the returned fields (arrival/departure times). It is clearly a per-train stop list, distinguishable from thsr_timetable or thsr_seats, though it does not name 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?

The example trainNo values give practical guidance on input format, but there is no statement of when to use this versus thsr_timetable (schedules) or thsr_seats. Usage is implied by the purpose rather than spelled out.

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