ptv_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'search', which implies a non-destructive read operation, but it omits details like authentication requirements (api_key), rate limits, or any side effects. The description is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

The description is a single concise sentence, but it sacrifices necessary detail. While brevity is good, the sentence does not earn its place as it lacks important context. It is under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description should at least indicate the nature of the response (e.g., list of matching items). It does not. The tool's overall completeness is inadequate for reliable agent invocation.

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, both parameters ('search_term' and 'api_key') are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no information about their expected format, constraints, or purpose beyond their names. The description fails to compensate for the missing parameter descriptions.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'PTV stops, routes, or outlets'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like ptv_departures or ptv_stops_on_route which are more specific. However, it could be more precise about what constitutes a search result (e.g., matching entities).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings. For example, it does not clarify that ptv_search is for general textual search while ptv_stops_on_route is for stops on a specific route. This leaves the agent without decision support.

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