transport_nearby_stops

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

Description adds that it returns id, name, coordinates, distance info, and Swiss coordinate bounds. Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so no contradiction.

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?

Very concise: four short sentences, each adding distinct value. No redundant or filler content.

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 output schema present, description mentions return fields. Lacks mention of authentication or prerequisites, but for a simple read-only tool this is acceptable.

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?

Input schema already provides detailed descriptions for all parameters. Description only repeats the coordinate bounds already in schema, adding no new semantic value beyond a baseline for high schema coverage.

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 finds public transport stops near a geographic location, distinguishes from siblings like transport_search_stop by specifying coordinates, and mentions Swiss coordinate bounds.

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 usage context (near schools, addresses, POIs) and geographic constraints. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mention, but implied by coordinate focus.

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