Información de un paradero

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns specific fields (name, coordinates, accessibility, services) which is useful context beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't mention what happens for invalid/unknown stop codes or error behavior.

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?

A single compact sentence that conveys purpose and return fields with zero wasted words. Appropriately front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 tool is a simple single-parameter lookup with an output schema and clear read-only annotations. The description covers purpose and return fields adequately. It falls slightly short on guiding invalid-code behavior and how the returned 'servicios' are structured, but for a straightforward lookup this is near-adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and only one param (stop_code), the description's 'por su código' indicates the parameter is a stop code string. However, it doesn't clarify the code format, whether it must be URL-encoded, or where to obtain valid codes. The description provides minimal addition over the bare schema field name.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Obtener información detallada de un paradero') and specifies the key identifier (código). It clearly states the fields returned (nombre, coordenadas, accesibilidad, servicios). While clear, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling search_stops or find_nearby_stops, though the focus on retrieving by code implies a singular lookup rather than search.

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 mentions lookup by stop code but provides no guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like search_stops or find_nearby_stops. There's no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use, no prerequisites, and no mention that stop_code should come from a search-first workflow.

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