get-train-route-stations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the query behavior and return data, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or data freshness. For a read operation with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loaded and concise with two sentences that efficiently convey purpose, inputs, and outputs. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 100% schema coverage, the description adequately covers the query purpose but lacks behavioral context and output details. It is minimally viable but incomplete for a tool with four required parameters.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning '车次号或官方编号' which aligns with train_no, but does not provide additional context beyond what the schema specifies.

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 the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('查询', '返回') and resources ('列车经停站全表', '所有经停站、到发时刻、停留时间'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on route station details rather than time, pricing, tickets, transfers, or station searches.

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 by specifying inputs ('车次号或官方编号') and outputs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like query-tickets or query-transfer. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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