get_ferry_routes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get information', implying a read operation, but does not disclose whether schedules are live or static, what fields are returned, whether results are cached, or any other behavioral traits.

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 one short sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is concise, though it largely paraphrases the tool name and adds little new information.

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 zero-parameter read tool, the description gives the basic purpose. However, with no output schema, no annotations, and sibling tools like list_ferries, an agent may not know what data to expect or when this tool is the right choice over its siblings.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is required here.

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 names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('ferry routes and schedules'), so an agent can tell what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like list_ferries, but the route/schedule focus is reasonably specific.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus list_ferries, track_ferry, or get_harbor_weather. No alternatives, exclusions, or context cues are provided; an agent must infer usage from the name and one-line description.

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