get_stations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that data is a snapshot and not real-time, which is a non-obvious limitation. It also implies a read-only 'list' operation. This is good, though it does not mention response size, pagination, or potential errors.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a concise caveat about data timeliness. No fluff or repetition.

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?

The description explains what the tool returns (station list with availability fields) and adds a freshness caveat. There is no output schema, so this is sufficient for a simple listing tool. Missing details like sorting or station count are minor.

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 only parameter, 'format', has a complete schema description ('Response format. Defaults to json.') with an enum. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description does not need to add anything. The tool description does not mention parameters, but the schema already fully accounts for them.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List every Bizi Zaragoza station.' It also enumerates the included data (bikes available, free anchors, capacity, location), making the tool's purpose immediately clear and distinct from sibling tools like get_rankings or get_alerts.

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 useful context about data freshness ('latest known availability snapshot', 'not necessarily real time'), which helps an agent decide if this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over siblings or exclude any cases.

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