Search ClickBus trips v5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description's 'read-only' and 'Does not book' largely echo that. It adds a little context by specifying the HTTP method and a JSON 200 response, but no deeper behavior such as response shaping or pagination.

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, no filler, and the most important qualifier ('Read-only', 'Does not book') is front-loaded. The structure is easy to scan.

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 and several overlapping siblings, the definition is too thin to fully orient an agent. It omits what the returned trip list contains, how privacy_mode and response_format affect results, and why v5 should be chosen over the unversioned search_trips tool.

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 schema documents from, to, and departure_date, but the description adds no parameter meaning. privacy_mode and response_format are left as unexplained enums, and the description's 'JSON 200' does not clarify the default markdown response set by response_format, so it fails to compensate for the 60% schema coverage.

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 identifies a specific resource (GET /api/v5/trips) and primary behavior (read-only trip search) and adds an explicit safety qualifier ('Does not book'). It does not differentiate this v5 tool from the sibling clickbus_search_trips, but the core purpose is clear.

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 gives no context for when to choose this tool over alternatives. The only exclusion, 'Does not book', is an obvious corollary of the name and is not tied to an alternative booking tool; there is also no guidance separating v5 from the plain clickbus_search_trips sibling.

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