zurich_vbz_passengers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that data is yearly updated, but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or exact response structure. Some additional context but not comprehensive.

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 two main sentences and a returns line. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. The returns line is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, but it adds clarity.

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, the description does not need to detail return values. It mentions key aspects (yearly updates, vehicle types). The omission of real-time indicator is acceptable as a static dataset.

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%, meaning the tool description does not compensate for the schema's parameter descriptions. The text only mentions line and stop examples, ignoring limit, query, and format parameters. The schema itself has descriptions, but the tool description adds minimal value.

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 specifies that the tool retrieves passenger numbers for VBZ lines and stops, including vehicle types and yearly updates. This distinguishes it from unrelated sibling tools like parliament or weather data.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The context implies it is for VBZ passenger data, but alternatives or exclusions are not mentioned.

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