get_routes_at_stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that routes are returned, but does not mention read-only nature, authentication requirements, or side effects. The minimal description fails to inform the agent about tool safety or constraints.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the core action and resource, earning the highest score for conciseness.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is adequate but lacks context about the output or how it relates to siblings. It could mention that it returns route identifiers or provide usage hints, but it is not severely incomplete.

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 description explicitly links the parameter stop_id to a specific stop (paradero), adding meaning beyond the schema's title 'Stop Id'. With 0% schema description coverage, this contextualization is valuable, though more detail (e.g., format or examples) could improve it.

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 routes serving a given stop (paradero). It specifies the resource (routes at a stop) and the parameter (stop_id). While it distinguishes from siblings like get_arrivals or get_stops implicitly, it does not explicitly differentiate them, preventing a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_arrivals or get_route_info. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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