get_station_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It implies a read-only operation via '取得' but does not mention any traits such as required auth, limitations, error handling, or whether results are paginated. For a read tool, this is minimal disclosure.

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 sentence that is concise but under-specified. It states the core purpose and data source, but the minimal structure means it doesn't provide extra value beyond a tautology of the tool name plus a source reference.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a vague description, the tool is incomplete for reliable use. It doesn't explain what basic info is returned, how to interpret results, or any constraints, making it insufficient for an agent to invoke confidently.

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 50% (station_name has a description, operator has none), and the description adds no parameter information at all. It does not help clarify what 'operator' means or how station_name should be formatted, so it fails to compensate for the schema gaps.

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 acquires basic station information from the ODPT API, using a specific verb '取得' (acquire) and a clear resource '駅の基本情報' (basic station info). It is distinct from sibling tools which deal with routes, weather, and ferries, though it doesn't specify exactly what 'basic info' includes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_route or get_timetable. It only states what the tool does, not when it should be preferred or any exclusions.

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