matatu_route_finder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds 'DEMO' and 'between Kenyan towns', which gives some behavioral context (limited/demonstration scope and geographic restriction), but it does not elaborate on what 'DEMO' implies (e.g., sample data, incomplete coverage).

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. 'Find matatu routes between Kenyan towns. DEMO.' delivers the core purpose and a key caveat efficiently.

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 tool's simplicity, an output schema, and readOnly annotation, the description is mostly adequate. However, it does not explain what 'DEMO' entails or possible edge cases (e.g., no route found, unsupported towns), leaving some ambiguity for a production-minded agent.

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 0%, and the description says 'between Kenyan towns', which implies that origin and destination are town names in Kenya. However, it offers no format, examples, or additional constraints beyond the schema's basic string type.

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 a specific verb ('Find'), resource ('matatu routes'), and geographic scope ('between Kenyan towns'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'ntsa_services_guide' and 'boda_licensing_guide', which are informational guides rather than route finders.

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 for route finding but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling guides, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative tools. It provides clear context but lacks explicit guidance.

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