Поездки

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: flights, trains, and hotels are aggregated, and the card includes route, status, and insurance. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

Three sentences cover domain, call modes, and the key sibling distinction. The main behavior is front-loaded and no words are wasted.

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 one optional parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema present, the description covers everything an agent needs: what the tool returns, how the argument changes the result, and how it differs from orders().

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that trip_id switches the response from list to card. It does not specify the id format or provenance, but for one optional parameter this is enough.

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 says exactly what the tool returns: with no argument it is the list of trips, with trip_id it is a trip card with route, status, and insurance. It also names the closest sibling orders() and says the difference: it is only trips, not all verticals.

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?

It explicitly gives the two call modes (no argument = list, trip_id = card) and an exclusion rule: use orders() when all verticals are needed, use trips only for trips. That is clear when/when-not guidance for tool selection.

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