alphaportal_get_bus_location

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: this returns the last known position, and the result is empty when the bus is not running. That edge-case disclosure prevents an agent from misreading an empty payload as an error, though freshness/staleness timing and auth requirements are unstated.

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 sentences with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the field list plus the empty-result caveat are tightly packed into the remainder.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does it well by naming latitude, longitude, speed, and vehicle id, plus the empty-result case. It stops short of describing error conditions or how stale the 'last known position' may be.

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%, and the schema already documents both studentId (with its source tool) and the AM/PM enum semantics. The description's reference to the 'selected run (AM or PM)' merely echoes the schema, adding no syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (live GPS location of a student's bus) scoped to the selected AM/PM run. No sibling tool covers bus location, so an agent can immediately route here rather than to get_student or get_student_stops.

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 implies usage context via 'for the selected run (AM or PM)' and 'empty when the bus is not currently running', which tells the agent the expected precondition. However, it names no alternative tool and gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance, leaving usage to inference.

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