transport_trip_plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's claim of returning trips without modification aligns. It adds useful context such as operating like the SBB app and specifying return structure, but does not disclose performance characteristics or edge cases beyond the annotation.

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 concise, with three well-structured paragraphs that front-load the core purpose, followed by usage tips and return overview. No unnecessary sentences or redundancy.

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?

The description covers primary use, input advice, and return structure, but lacks details on optional parameters (time, limit) and their defaults. Given an existing output schema, the description is mostly complete, but minor omissions prevent a perfect score.

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% according to context, but the description mentions origin and destination parameters and their preferred inputs. However, it omits the time and limit parameters, which are described in the schema. The description adds value by suggesting stop IDs, but incomplete coverage reduces the score.

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 defines the tool as planning a journey between two locations in Switzerland, explicitly stating it returns multiple trip options with transfers, durations, and transport modes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like transport_search_stop.

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 explicit guidance on when to use stop IDs from transport_search_stop for best results and notes that place names work but may be slower, effectively differentiating between this tool and its sibling for stop search.

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