Buscar paraderos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by noting partial matching ('nombre o código parcial'), which is a behavioral trait not in the annotations. However, it doesn't disclose behavior around limit handling, pagination, or response format, which is acceptable given the annotations already carry the safety burden.

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, zero waste. States the purpose and the key usage context. Front-loaded with the action, well-organized.

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?

Has an output schema, so return values need no explanation. 2 simple params with defaults, read-only annotations, a clear purpose, and a usage hint. For a low-complexity search tool, this is complete enough. It doesn't over-explain and covers what an agent needs.

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%, but with only 2 params (query, limit), the schema defaults carry most of the burden. The description mentions 'nombre o código parcial' which maps to the query param semantics, adding context beyond 'Query' as a title. No detail on limit beyond the default. Baseline 3 is appropriate; description adds marginal value.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Buscar paraderos') with scope ('de Santiago') and search dimensions ('por nombre o código parcial'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_stop (which resolves a specific stop) and find_nearby_stops (geospatial search), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use context: 'Útil cuando el usuario menciona un lugar o intersección y hay que resolver el código del paradero.' This implies the use case of resolving a stop code from a partial name/place mention. Doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the implied usage context distinguishes it from geospatial tools.

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