zurich_vbz_passengers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, read-only, and open-world operation. The description adds context by noting the data is annually updated, which is a behavioral trait beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value (purpose, update frequency, coverage, return type). No wasted words.

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 the essential purpose and data characteristics. Given an output schema exists (context confirms), return values need not be detailed. The description mentions annual update frequency, which is important. It is complete for a simple query tool, though it could optionally include more about output format or limitations.

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?

The tool description does not elaborate on any parameters; it relies entirely on the input schema, which has descriptions for all four parameters (line, stop, limit, query). Since schema description coverage is 0% (meaning no parameter info in the description), the description fails to compensate. The schema already provides adequate meaning, but the description adds nothing.

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 queries passenger numbers for Zurich Transport (VBZ), specifies the data type (annually updated boarding/alighting per line and stop), and covers modes (tram, bus, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with other Zurich 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?

The description implies usage for retrieving passenger data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like zurich_pedestrian_traffic or other Zurich data tools. It mentions annual updates, which hints at data freshness, but no when-not-to or alternative references.

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