get_train_run_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it queries info, which implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly mention that, nor does it disclose any authentication, rate limits, or output characteristics. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loads the purpose and then lists parameter explanations. It is efficient and well-structured, with no wasted words. The parameter notes are concise yet informative.

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?

Given the output schema exists, return values are covered elsewhere. However, the description does not state whether at least one filter is required, whether any combination of parameters is valid, or whether pagination applies. For a query tool with five optional parameters, this missing context could cause incorrect invocations.

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%, so the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: run_ymd as a specific date in YYYYMMDD format, run_ymd_gte/lte as a date range, stn_nm as station name with example, and mrnt_nm as line name with example. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema and helps the agent construct valid queries.

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 it queries passenger train actual operation info, including operation date, actual departure/arrival times by station, and stop classification. This is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_train_run_plan or get_train_run_history, so it loses a point.

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 parameter syntax but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of conditions or scenarios where this tool is preferred over get_train_run_plan or get_train_run_history. The tool name implies 'actual' data, but the description does not elaborate.

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