Elenco Tratte Ferroviarie

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Restituisce' implies a read operation, and it discloses the return content (segments + occupancy status), which is genuinely useful. However, it omits any behavioral context such as permissions, result size, or whether the occupancy status is real-time vs cached.

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?

Two tight sentences, with the resource and return content front-loaded ahead of the parameter details. No filler; each clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be fully specified, and the single optional parameter is documented. For a read-only listing tool this is nearly complete; the only gap is the lack of usage routing versus sibling tools.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explains that 'categorie' is a comma-separated filter and lists the accepted values ('ES*,IC,EXP,EC,EN,REG'). It adds real meaning beyond the bare string type, though the use of 'includono' leaves ambiguity about whether the list is exhaustive.

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?

States a specific verb ('Restituisce') and resource ('segmenti della rete ferroviaria nazionale') plus the returned content (node pairs with coordinates and occupancy status). It is clear what the tool produces, but it never distinguishes itself from the closely related sibling 'treni_su_tratta', which an agent could easily confuse with this.

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 (listing the network segments) but offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not route the agent between this tool and alternatives such as treni_su_tratta or elenco_stazioni_regione, leaving selection to inference.

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